In fact, it's so far ahead of what much of the competition is offering that it can be difficult to describe the experience of using it to someone who hasn't yet tried VR themselves – it's akin to trying to describe moving footage to someone who's spent their whole life staring at pictures, or describing a game to someone who's only ever watched films.

At times it can even be difficult describing the Vive to someone who's only ever used cheaper mobile VR hardware like the Gear VR or Google Cardboard.

But the highest compliment we can give to the HTC Vive is just how right it immediately feels, and how easily all your reservations about VR fall away as soon as you start using it – even if you've been a VR naysayer up until now.

[Update: HTC surprised many in early 2018 when it announced a new headset, the HTC Vive Pro. It offers an exceptional upgrade to the original Vive, including higher resolution (2880 x 1600) and built-in, souped-up audio. Those extra pixels mean a cleaner view and virtually no screen door effect during gameplay.

As expected, the new headset is EXPENSIVE. HTC announced that the headset will cost $799/£799 (about AU$1,015) just for the headset alone, which will be available for purchase starting on April 5 2018.

If that's too rich for your blood, you can also now get the HTC Vive at a reduced price of $499 or £499 (about AU$615).]

Virtual reality is an entirely new medium and, to that end, has some of the problems all new mediums face when they first start out. The naysayers will claim that there isn't a great library of games out yet – technically not a true statement, but one we hear all the time nonetheless.

They'll say that it's too expensive and the hardware just isn't that good yet, but while it's a somewhat pricey setup, the experience you'll get on the HTC Vive is unrivaled. It's lightyears ahead of Google Cardboard and Samsung Gear VR, miles ahead of PlayStation VR and, until very recently, the Oculus Rift, too.

And, as it turns out, we're not the only ones who think so – developers agree. A recent study on Gamasutra reported that 49% of the companies they surveyed were currently developing games for the Vive while only about 43% said they were working on a game for Oculus Rift.

When paired with the proper hardware – a PC with an Intel Core i5-4590K and either a Nvidia GTX 970 or AMD R9 390 GPU – the HTC Vive is an incredible gateway into a new medium, one that is currently dominated by short demos and rough-around-the-edges games, but should one day play host to full-length films, television shows and contemporary art.

The positives, in condensed form, include: one-to-one movement tracking; a perfectly natural 110-degree field of view; there's nary a screen tear or dropped frame when you're using the right equipment; movement feels natural; it has best-in-class controllers; and the experiences, the demos and the games available through SteamVR, simply blow the competitors away.

But before we tackle games, let's address elephant in the room: price.

The HTC Vive itself wasn't cheap at launch or for a long time after, but on March 19, it got just a shade less expensive. As of now, the system, which includes the headset, the controllers and the base stations themselves, sells for $499 or £499 (about AU$615), and that's before you buy a computer with the recommended specs.

For comparison, the Vive now costs just $100 more than Oculus Rift. Now, ultimately the question is whether you'll find that it's worth the extra cash for a better experience, even though it's not as much cash as it once was.

That's a fair discussion to have, albeit one that we can do almost nothing about right now. New hardware, especially at the cutting edge of a nascent industry, is going to be expensive.

But wait, why is it more expensive? What exactly does it do?

How does the HTC Vive work?

The first time we got our hands on the HTC Vive was at Mobile World Congress 2015, where HTC first made the announcement of its partnership with Valve, and it has been retooled and vastly improved since that original showing.

The consumer version works wonderfully, is vastly easier to setup and feels ready to be shipped to the public which, considering that units are supposed to go out any day now, is a very good thing.

Like other virtual reality headsets, the Vive has the arduous task of completely immersing you in a video game by producing two images simultaneously. However, unlike PlayStation VR and Oculus Rift that use a single camera to track your head and extremities, HTC Vive has two base stations, which sit on the wall attached to the included wall mounts or a high shelf and help map track your movements as you walk around in the 3D world.

What the stations track are small divots on the top of the two controllers and on the headset itself. There are 72 of these dots speckling the controllers and helmet that help accurately track the Vive.

Inside every box is a Vive headset unit, two controllers, two base stations, a cloth to wipe down the lenses, a small hub that sits between the headset and your PC, charging cords for the controllers and power cables for base stations. Also packaged with every unit are three games: Job Simulator, Fantastic Contraption and The Lab. It's everything you're going to need for a great virtual reality experience minus the computer that powers the whole thing.

New to the consumer version is a spectacularly simple setup program that should, for the vast majority of tech enthusiasts, allow you to breeze through the setup process.

Once you're plugged in and the room has been mapped out, you're free to roam around every inch of the digital space. This means digital worlds can be more expansive and more immersive on the Vive than the other two systems and, thankfully, less nausea-inducing, too.

The only limitations you'll encounter once inside your digital world are faint blue walls made up of lines that keep you inside the playzone. These blue lines are superimposed into your game by SteamVR, the software put out by Valve that's running underneath every virtual experience.

It's called "chaperone mode," and its practical application is to prevent you from moving too far outside the area that you've set up for the Vive and potentially stumbling into furniture/plants/animals/etc around your home and hurting yourself.

As for the games themselves, what's there is simply amazing.

In the course of two weeks, I've played 20 or so titles, some of which are much, much better than others. I'll cover them in detail in a moment but, in short, they were mostly fantastic showcases for VR, full of personality and just as varied as you might expect. One minute I was on top of a castle fending off stickman invaders with a bow and arrow, the next I was inside of an arcade cabinet fighting spaceships in three dimensions. I played mini-golf on an impossibly constructed multi-level course and trained to become both a ninja and space pirate.

Some of what I just described is part of Valve's The Lab, a collection of games that the iconic developer put together to introduce players to virtual reality. While I haven't seen every third-party title on the Vive (it's almost impossible considering that about 5-10 new games have been added every day in the past two weeks), the difference between first-party and third-party titles are night and day.

This is something I see changing in the coming weeks, months and years, however, and not something I hold against the system on day one.

The final iteration of the HTC Vive is best described as a bulbous visor taken straight from the pages of a science fiction novel. It's heavier (and therefore a bit less comfortable) than both the Oculus Rift or PlayStation VR, but the additional weight isn't something you notice once you're fully immersed in Vive's brave new world.

The headset is supported by three velcro straps that wrap around the top and sides of the Vive and meet in the back to form a cradle for your noggin. This cradle keeps the Vive from falling off or slipping too far left or right. And while they do a fair job preventing major malfunctions, the straps are arguably the least user-friendly part of the Vive. Adjusting them while the headset is on is a difficult endeavor, and getting an exact fit takes a bit of trial and error. But, once you finally find a position that feels right, all that's left to do is turn the knob located on the right side of the headset to increase/decrease the focal length of the lens to reduce blurriness.

Three cords go from the top of the headset to a small hub that connects the visor to your computer. I know what you're thinking, and no, there's no way to connect it wirelessly to your PC at this time. Thankfully the cords are at least neatly bundled together which means you only need to avoid one large, 15-foot cable instead of three separate smaller ones. From the small gray hub, you'll need to run one cord to a USB 2.0 port on your computer, another cord to an open HDMI port (something you might struggle with if you use the HDMI port on your PC for your monitor) and one power cable to an open outlet.

Like the Oculus Rift, the HTC Vive allows you to use your own headphones instead of forcing a pair on you. I picked a pair of Creative Sound Blaster H5s due to their padding and excellent sound quality, but the Vive welcomes anything from a pair of high-end Sennheisers to cheap earbuds.

Inside the headset is a 2160 x 1200 OLED screen that runs at 90Hz. For comparison, that's slightly less than the PlayStation VR's 120Hz refresh rate, but because the Vive is running off a more powerful GPU, it's not exactly comparing apples to apples. You can expect a 110-degree field of view, which is one of the largest available on any virtual reality headset and results in a more immersive experience.

The base stations, which are crucial to mapping the playspace and tracking you as you move about the room, should sit on a nearby wall or high shelf in order to do their job to the best of their ability. The latest version of the stations are smaller, wireless and make a dull hum that's almost inaudible unless you're standing right next to them. A minor annoyance I found is that the power cables for the base stations are a bit short, which in the end forced me to re-arrange my living room in order to place the IR cameras closer to an outlet.

Similarly the controllers are also much more versatile compared to the competition, giving developers many more tools to work with. Each controller has a clickable touchpad and a rear trigger that has two stages to allow for more refined interaction. While they're a bit bigger in stature than the Oculus Touch or PlayStation Move, the Vive's controllers function exponentially better than either.

The main buttons you'll need to familiarize yourself with are start and connect buttons located above and below the touchpad, two side buttons that can be pushed with your ring finger and the palm of your hand and the trigger on the back.

Moving around in-game might take a combination of pressing a trigger and the touch-pad, using a trigger to jump from spot to spot or physically walking from one part of the room to the other, depending on the title. While the Oculus Rift can track a playspace of around 5 x 11 feet and the PlayStation VR can spot you in an area of around 8 x 6 feet, the HTC Vive has a maximum tracking area of 15 x 15 feet. It's a substantial difference and one that takes VR from a sedentary experience to a truly immersive one.

Vive is not only immersive, but also strangely social thanks to an additional window that pops up on your monitor whenever SteamVR is active that shows onlookers exactly what you're seeing in-game. I found this incredibly helpful when guiding my friends through games for the first time or for the times when I wanted my friends to see what I was seeing in VR.

Performance

So far I've used words like "immersive," "amazing" and "best headset on the market, bar none" when describing the HTC Vive. I could rant for pages and pages how much I've enjoyed my time with the headset but, without trying it for yourself, it's tough to fully appreciate just how close to perfect this technology is.

While other systems lag behind your movements or have a noticeable delay, the Vive can intelligently track exactly where you are in the room and what you're doing with your hands. That sounds like it should be a given, but you wouldn't believe how many demos I've tried where the system just couldn't figure out where I was standing or how I was holding my arms.

When you don't get one-to-one tracking, it's an absolute nightmare for your brain, creating a sort of cognitive dissonance that makes you feel both nauseated and unnatural. Now sure, there were one or two points during my two-week odyssey that things didn't go exactly right (I nearly vomited while playing a poorly rendered dungeon crawler), but those times were far fewer here than on Oculus or PlayStation's hardware.

Here's what my living room turned into after I got my Vive.

The games and demos you'll experience on the HTC Vive range in levity, from casual, low-stress romps, to crazy firefights, to a surgeon simulator and even a horror title or two to keep you on your toes. While experiences on PlayStation VR are better kept to the former, the Vive is versatile enough to do either and is probably the only one capable of the latter without causing severe motion sickness.

I counted 49 titles the morning the HTC Vive launched, 19 more than the Oculus Rift launched with last week. Valve won't even provide reviewers with a definitive number on how many titles will appear on Steam over the coming days and weeks because, frankly, that number is prone to doubling or tripling within a week of launch.

With all these games, it's a major boon for the system that switching between games takes seconds. To move from one game to the next, all you need to do is press the system button to pull up the Steam VR interface and then select another title to load up.

Here are a few of the experiences – both demos and games – I've tried over the past two weeks on the HTC Vive to give some context as to what I've experienced:

The Lab: Best described as the Hello World of virtual reality, The Lab is a collection of demos developed by Valve that serve as an introduction to Vive's brave new world. Included in The Lab are four games that put you on a scenic, photorealistic mountainside; in the middle of Aperture's warehouse and arms you with a massive mechanical ballista; on the precipice of a castle; and inside a 3D version of Galaga.

Audio Shield: Audio Shield is a deceivingly simple game. First, pick any audio file from your music library. Then, once the beat starts, block the incoming colored projectiles with the color-coordinated shield in time with the music. It's Dance Central meets 300 in a very weird, but totally enjoyable music mash-up.

Vanishing Realm: Rite of Steel: Vanishing Realm fulfills the quota of one fantasy title needed to release any new system. In it, you're tasked to explore a cave and fight off the magical undead minions that have overrun the joint. Along the way you'll find swords, bows and arrows and wands galore that will help you get the job done.

Water Bears VR: I'm a sucker for a good puzzle game. Water Bears is best described as the virtual reality equivalent of Where's My Water? In it, you'll be asked to direct streams of colored water to similarly colored globes that contain the eponymous aquatic ursines. Direct the water to the right bubbles and the miniature creatures will bust out of their liquid prisons.

While 99% of my experience with the Vive has been an incredible look at the capabilities of virtual reality, there are some parts of the Vive VR experience that aren't as great as you'd hope – for one, there's still that damn wire connecting you to your high-end PC, and it's easy to trip over it when you forget it's there. You can't blame HTC too much for this, as the Vive is streaming two distinct Full HD images without a hint of latency, and the gaming experience needs to preserved above all else.

But even Full HD isn't as clear as you'd want it to be – HTC calls it 'photorealistic', but you'd never struggle to tell the difference between a photo and the real world here.

That's not to say it breaks the immersion when you're in the VR world or even that it's overly grainy or pixelated – it's not. But objects in games aren't always completely clear when you really look at them. Now, that's a different story for local media played inside the headset via a virtual TV set up in a faux-living room but, in reality, I'm not sure putting a 1080p image on an $800 headset is a feature that's worth writing home about.

At this stage at least it's easy to tell the virtual world from the real one and, for some people, that might make the Vive come off as more of a novelty like Nintendo's Wii rather than the ground-breaking innovation that I see it as.

Out of all the questions I've been asked over the past two weeks, the most frequent ones are "what is like to spend a few hours in virtual reality?" and "will it make me sick?"

While I've tried to keep most of this review as objective as possible, there's simply no way to answer these questions with a one-size-fits-all remark. The answer, quite simply, is that your miles may vary. Some of you, even the most hardcore of hardcore gamers might feel like the world has been pulled out under your feet when you step into virtual reality. It's one hundred million times better than what the Virtual Boy offered two decades ago, but I've both watched – and experienced first-hand – a bad reaction to the hardware that comes with a bad demo.

With that said, I'll do my best to answer these questions as specifically as I can with the knowledge I've gleaned over the past few weeks.

Motion sickness and building a tolerance to VR

The first time I tried virtual reality I felt very sick.

For the longest time (which approximately comes out to about two and a half years now) I've avoided virtual reality because of one bad experience early on with the Oculus Rift.

After that, it seemed like no matter what hardware I was using the mere act of putting on a VR visor induced both a nauseating feeling in the pit of my stomach and an overwhelming dread.

I gave up on virtual reality for awhile.

It took two new iterations of Oculus and a complete overhaul of the HTC Vive to bring me back into VR. I can now safely say that a lot of those negative feelings I had in the beginning have been dispelled, and I feel almost as comfortable in the virtual world as I do in the real one.

I achieved this by subjecting myself to the feelings of disassociation, anxiety and paralyzing overwhelmingness that you get when you put on a virtual reality headset on multiple occasions.

So, coming back full circle to the question at hand, will it make you sick?

If you're like me the answer is, at first, it might. Your body isn't used to feeling disconnected to the visual stimuli it's receiving. Even if you game for hours and hours per day, you still are sitting in the real world, periodically removing your gaze from the television screen to look at your cellphone or interact with another human being. In virtual reality, the only thing you ever see is the screen and the objects on it.

The good news is, as long as you're playing games that are designed well and do everything they can to minimize screen jitter, you should start to develop a tolerance quickly.

Extended use: a double-edged sword

Another long-held belief that I gave up after owning the Vive for two weeks is that the maximum amount of time someone can spend in virtual reality is 30 minutes.

Over the course of the past two weeks, I've easily spent two or three hours a day inside the headset. A vast majority of those sessions lasted more than an hour and some tallied closer to two and three. Usually these long hauls involved more than one game – I'd spend 30 minutes play The Lab, before playing Space Pirate Simulator, Ninja Trainer or Water Bears – but, if there were longer experiences available, I could see myself dedicating the same amount of time solely to a single experience.

The first problem with that scenario is that these longform experiences simply don't exist yet. Again, this is something that will be remedied quickly, but it's worth pointing out that should you buy an HTC Vive this week, don't expect to find something like Mirror's Edge or Skyrim ready to play and explore as soon as you start up the system.

The second problem is that, while I enjoyed every second I spent in virtual reality, the transition of coming back to the real world was one that I found especially difficult. Without dramatizing the emotions, I felt as though I wasn't all there when I took off the helmet. The closest feeling I can pick out is the one where you look at yourself in the mirror and don't really understand the person looking back at you.

You'll still be you, but it won't feel like you at first.

Like playing a regular video game on a 2-D screen, you'll still get image burn-in (called the Tetris Effect) but, at least for me, I also had the slight outline of faint blue lines from Chaperone mode hang in the background of my vision long after I've taken off the visor.

These side-effects aren't something that concerns me and I'll keep to my habits of extended use after I'm done writing this review. I've played video games on CRT TVs long enough to know that, while strange, these secondary effects do fade in time without leaving behind permanent damage.

The future of Vive and VR in general

I hope, by this point in the review, I've imparted a modicum of my excitement about the HTC Vive and the experiences it can provide.

What's amazing is that, even though I feel like I've covered the product extensively in the last 3,000 or so words, there are still four or five more features that the HTC Vive is capable of that no one has talked about and no developer has even begun to touch.

In no particular order, they include multiplayer gaming, videos in virtual reality, using the front-facing camera for augmented reality games, integrating the headset with your cellphone to enable texts and calling without taking off the headset, and using the cameras and your headphones' microphone to virtually meet up and chat with other players through SteamVR.

Some of these features may already be implemented and others may be in the works but, at no time in the past two weeks, has Steam stopped me and said, "hey, why don't you start a voice chat in VR with a friend or watch a 360-degree YouTube video."

Maybe the developers didn't want to be intrusive or tell you how to use your new investment. Maybe the headset is just more powerful than developers are creative at this point. Or maybe I've just missed a feature or prompt that fell in between the cracks.

In any event, I view these potential features more with excitement and less with disappointment. I can't wait until Valve finds a way to show off videos made in virtual reality or finds some way to enable multiplayer between two people using HTC Vives.

More games would be great, don't get me wrong, but these are core functions of the headset that – as of right now – are completely going unused or are being used in very minimal ways. (The front-facing camera, for example, can be turned on and off to see how close you are to objects should you feel the Chaperone isn't quite right.)

In addition to the weight and cost of the headset, these are all areas of improvement or new features that I see HTC and Valve working on over the course of the next two years before the announcement of the Vive's inevitable sequel.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but, until you try it for yourself at a friend's house or in your own living room, you can't possibly predict how much you'll enjoy the HTC Vive. (But, if I had to guess, I'd say the answer will be "a lot.")

If you want a free estimate, however, answer the following questions as honestly as you can: How much time will I dedicate to a technology that requires me to re-arrange my living room every time I want to use it and, more importantly, how much do I trust that developers to continue to support the Vive down the road?

One of those factors is entirely out of your hands. The other requires a fair bit of honesty with yourself. If you don't plan on digging deep into the software and buying loads of interesting demos and near-complete, but not quite retail-ready games, then the Vive isn't for you.

However, if you have a positive response for both questions, then it's a safe bet you'll enjoy this truly astounding piece of kit.

At the heart of this experience is excellent hardware and software. A 110-degree field of view means that games will feel more natural, and a larger area to walk around in will keep you from feeling restrained or claustrophobic in your new virtual environment.

This is coupled with two absolutely superb controllers that are shipping right now as we speak with the headset, not at some undisclosed time down the road. And sitting just below everything else is Steam, the trusty marketplace of PC gaming that has supplied millions of gamers with software for the past decade. The infrastructure of this platform is as solid here as it's like to get.

Admittedly, this level of perfection isn't without a price. To start, you'll need to plonk down $800 / £689 / €899 to buy the unit itself. Then, if you want the minimum recommended specs, it'll cost you another few hundred for the Nvidia GTX 970 or AMD 290 (and potentially a whole new PC to house it), which isn't cheap. Then you'll need a space big enough to fully enjoy your new escape from reality which, if you live in a place like San Francisco, London or New York, can be the most expensive part. Of course you can enjoy most games in smaller spaces, but in doing so you're freely giving away the Vive's biggest advantage: virtual space.

We liked

Nearly everything. The Vive remains the best virtual reality headset on the market, bar none. The fact that it allows for room-scale virtual reality should sell it alone, but the fact that it does so in a way that's more believable and fluid than other headsets handle seated play puts the nail in the coffin.

Add to that the two incredibly intuitive controllers that ship with the unit itself on day one, and a library of games that seems to be growing in size at an uncontrollable rate and you have a wildly compelling package at any price.

We disliked

Not to beat the proverbial horse here but, despite all the positives I've mentioned here, only a small handful of gamers will get to experience VR on the HTC Vive – not because they don't want to, but because $800 / £689 / €899 is just out of their price range.

It's also important to remember that experiences vary based on the hardware you're using. If games run lag-free on a friend's computer, but run like a terrible molasses seizure on yours, don't blame the headset.

While it's not necessarily a negative, the onus now is on developers to leverage the technology and push VR forward. Valve and HTC have enabled a realm of new experiences possible but, what scares me, is that all this technology may fall victim to novelty that will wear off in six months, turning an expensive headset into nothing more than a companion for the Wii that sits in our closets collecting dust.

Final verdict

Putting fears of abandonment aside, HTC created something amazing with the Vive, and that's been refined in the final consumer iteration of the hardware.

It's more immersive than the competition thanks to the ability to walk around in the space, and the reduction of wires from the base stations and controllers is hugely welcome. Gaming using this, even with short demos and incomplete games, feels like the future, and I can't wait to try a dozens more titles using the headset.

Many will wish the resolution was a tad better, that the price was a lower or that the headset fitted them better, but will appreciate that it's too early in the VR game for expectations of perfection. It's a balancing act between performance, size, resolution and price, and HTC seems like it's exactly where it needs to be to deliver on all fronts.

Pure and simple, the HTC Vive is awesome. Virtual reality is amazing. It's the beginning of a new format that isn't constrained to a 16 x 9 or 21 x 9 screen. In many ways, the HTC Vive and the Oculus Rift are similar to the watching the first step on the moon or the train coming out of the screen. They're pure, objective proof that entertainment isn't done evolving.

]]>http://www.techradar.com/reviews/wearables/htc-vive-1286775/reviewHTC Vive Prohttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/techradar/tech-reviews/~3/6vWE3KTAM-s/htc-vive-pro
http://www.techradar.com/reviews/htc-vive-proWhat’s it like to don HTC’s next Vive? We’ve gone face first into the latest hardware. Mon, 19 Mar 2018 21:05:59 +0000techradar.comUpdate: The HTC VIVE Pro will cost $799/£799 (about AU$1,015), HTC has announced. The price tag will only get you the updated headset, however. If you want a full package, you'll need to buy the Lighthouse Sensors and Vive Controllers separately. HTC also announced that the headset will start shipping on April 5, 2018, and that the price of original HTC Vive will drop down a to more reasonable $499/£499 (about AU$615).

Better start saving now!

Original article continues below...

HTC Vive is, in my opinion, the best virtual reality headset on the market. It was the first to offer hand tracking out of the box, and still reigns supreme as the best room-scale VR headset. The only problem is that the HTC Vive is losing its spot … to the HTC Vive Pro.

The Vive Pro enhances everything inside the original headset. It has a higher resolution (2880 x 1600). To phrase it a different way, the HTC Vive Pro can now display 615 dpi, which is a 78% increase over the current-gen Vive.

If the numbers aren’t painting a clear enough picture for you, all these extra pixels translate to a cleaner view and nearly screen door effect-free gameplay. The new headset will make it easier to read small text in games and applications.

Meanwhile, the addition of built-in headphones and extra boost in audio quality could help usher in real competitive shooters in VR. It doesn't help that it's lighter too.

All together it might only be a half-step towards a completely new HTC Vive - but hey, even half steps forward are welcomed here.

There will be new lighthouse sensors and controllers to go alongside the Vive Pro but, if the thought of a new headset setup scares you, you should know that the Vive Pro will be sold outside of a bundle and will be compatible with all HTC Vive 1.0 hardware.

Design

While the HTC Vive Pro isn’t a radical departure from the original Vive’s design, there are some subtle differences to the trained eye.

The first, and most subtle difference, is the color. The original Vive is best described as a light grey. The sequel, the HTC Vive Pro, is a dark grayish blue. It’s so subtle a shift, though, that you might not be able to notice it unless you looked at them both in-person in a brightly lit room.

The other major distinction, aesthetically at least, is the second front-facing camera lens. We spoke at length to several HTC employees about the additional camera, all of whom declined to comment on its purpose. They alluded to another announcement in the future, perhaps around the time pricing and availability is locked down.

Moving from the front of the Vive Pro to the sides, you’ll see the second enhancement, the new headphones. They look an awful lot like the Vive Deluxe Audio Strap, which wouldn’t be a bad thing should they turn out to be exactly the same.

While the original offered the freedom of using your own headphones, it’s nice to finally see an integrated option. Along the back of the headband is a twist knob that helps keep the headset snugly on your head.

Wires still run from the back of the headset to the PC - for now - but HTC does have a solution called the HTC Wireless Adapter that could eliminate that problem in the future.

Performance

So what’s one to make of all these upgrades? Well, after using it for a round or two of Evasion, a new Destiny-esque shooter from the Montreal-based studio Archiact, I walked away feeling better than I ever have about my favorite VR headset.

While the numbers tell a better story than I ever could, images on the 2880 x 1600 screen looks crisp. It was still possible to see the faint outlines of each individual pixel, but it became even easier to forget that the landscapes I saw were completely non-existent in real life.

It’s easy to point to the landscape because I think it’s here where most people focus when in the world of VR. Sure, you’ll spend copious time looking at enemies in shooting games, but it’s the environment that allows us to fully immerse ourselves in VR.

It’s always easier to point at the environments because that’s where higher-resolution assets already exist. Enemies - or worse, effects like flames or explosions - never seem to receive the same attention to detail and thanks to the increased resolution somehow make the experience less real now that we can more clearly see roughly hewn textures.

The best part of the demo was the lag … or rather the absolute absence of it.

One would think that a higher-resolution headset running on the same hardware would create judder or, at the very least, periodic slowdown. But it didn’t. It was something you could notice while using the HTC Wireless Adapter (which I’ll go into detail elsewhere) but when wired to a gaming PC the HTC Vive Pro still performed exactly as you’d expect.

Early verdict

The HTC Vive Pro isn’t a massive step forward for the Vive. It’s not the Vive 2 … as much as we’d like it to fulfill that role.

To that end, it offers minor improvements upon the original. The enhanced resolution makes games feel more immersive, and the inclusion of a built-in headset help the Vive shake that DIY feel that the original had.

Depending on the price it could be the half-step upgrade Vive needs to stay ahead of Rift - and, if nothing else, should keep the most discerning gamers tied over until the hardware leaps forward next generation.

New year, new tech – check out all our coverage of CES 2018 straight from Las Vegas, the greatest gadget show on Earth

The Garmin Forerunner 935 is a watch that brings the brilliant running power of the Forerunner range and adds in the capabilities of Garmin’s Fenix line… it’s the first watch to marry the two worlds.

It’s clear that Garmin is going further down this line, with subsequent watches taking the same kind of angle - but the 935 is still the one that impresses us the most. Yes, it’s incredibly expensive, but the monster battery life and range of activities make it hard to resist.

Garmin Forerunner 935 price and release date

It costs £469.99 ($500) in black, so it's anything but cheap (although the prices have dropped a touch). There’s also a tri-bundle option available for £589.99 ($650) which will come with a yellow strap in addition to the black one as well as HRM-Tri, HRM-Swim, and a Quick Release Kit.

Fitness, battery and performance metrics

The main thing that catches the eye (apart from the price) is the training load monitoring. It's a simple screen that can tell you how well your fitness is improving while noticing how much training load you are putting on - the emphasis on you is key there.

By using technology and algorithms from Firstbeat, a heartbeat and performance analytics company, the Garmin Forerunner 935 is capable of learning your fitness levels, working out where you are in a training cycle and giving you qualified information on how trained you actually are.

This is great for those in training for endurance events, where a training plan might feel a little too hard (or easy) and being able to work out if the schedule is actually having the desired effect on training load and fitness.

In practice, it works very well, monitoring your training loads and letting you know when you’re doing too many junk miles. It’s not always the sort of thing that will change your training plan - for instance, when we were told our fitness wasn’t improving it was because we were chucking in more miles to build base endurance - but it gives confidence that the watch knows your personal fitness accurately.

There are new options on offer now when it comes to the physiological monitoring - your resting heart rate is monitored well, and you can even check out your stress levels over the course of a day.

The battery life on this thing is insane though. Like, we’ve never seen a running watch that lasts as long… we’re getting up to 10 days between charges, and that’s with every day activity.

If you don’t ever fire up the GPS, you’re going to be getting weeks out of this thing… it’s the perfect watch for the ultra marathon or Ironman.

It helps that it doesn't pump out music like the new Garmin Forerunner 645, but if it did we reckon you'd still get a week's life.

And when it comes to the amount of things you can actually do with it, well… we’re not even sure what some of them are. Golfers can practice their shots and get information on their swing, people who like boats can do… something and even parachutists are catered for.

Parachutists! A watch even for them! It makes us want to hurl ourselves out of a plane just to use the ‘Jumpmaster’ mode.

In terms of the design of this watch... well, it's hard to believe how much stuff is crammed into such a small space. It's a sleek, flat design that would look fine replacing a standard day to day watch. It's similar to the 735XT, and has been a great thing to have strapped to the wrist on a daily basis.

The strap is a ridged, sleek experience, matching the main watch in color. The version we saw was an understated / boring black version, but you can also get a neon yellow version for something a bit more brazen.

The rear of the watch has a heart rate monitor bolted on, using Garmin's proprietary Elevate tech, and we now trust it as much as a chest strap - it’s actually shown itself to be a bit more helpful.

However, where previously Garmin users wanting to get the advanced running metrics (showing how high you're bouncing with each stride, whether you're more dominant on your left or right side etc) had to use a chest strap to have the accelerometer on their body.

The 935 offers a foot pod to take on the same role, and that's going to appeal to those that don't like feeling restricted by the strap. We’ve not tested that, and to be honest the advanced running metrics will only be of use to the top 1% of runners who need to know their ground contact time to get that extra edge.

The screen of the 935 has been upgraded over previous watches - offering an easy way to check out the multi-sport modes on this watch with an easy glance. There are almost too many metrics to mention here, but suffice to say that if you have a sport you like to track, you'll be able to do it here.

There's even an altimeter on board for hiking, so you'll be able to accurately check your elevation if you're a regular mountain goat.

The screen is really clear and legible, with an obviously upgraded amount of pixels over the earlier 630 and 735XT watches - and anyone moving up from a 620, for instance, is going to be bowled over.

The interface has been overhauled, but does look a bit busier than before. The main running screen is still simple and customisable, but there are more elements to look at when navigating through the watch, with a brighter user experience throughout.

If navigation is your thing, then the Fenix 5 is a better watch if you want mapping on the go, but the 935 has some navigation ability inside as well - you can easily find your way back to the start of your run.

Early verdict

The Forerunner 935 is a very strong watch from Garmin, one that mixes sleek design with power - but for a very high price.

It's only really something serious runners / triathletes should be considering strapping to their wrists, but if you’re willing to pay the price you’re getting a watch that will do pretty much anything you ask of it and last for days… and days… and days.

]]>http://www.techradar.com/reviews/garmin-forerunner-935Huawei MateBook X Prohttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/techradar/tech-reviews/~3/43o7pelx_bc/huawei-matebook-x-pro
http://www.techradar.com/reviews/huawei-matebook-x-proHuawei may have created a sleeper hit of a laptop for 2018 with MateBook X Pro.Mon, 19 Mar 2018 19:15:04 +0000techradar.comWe could not have seen this coming, but there may be a new ‘best laptop’ in town: the Huawei MateBook X Pro. We’ve been so taken aback by this sleeper hit laptop over the past few weeks, that we’re confident it will threaten the highest ranking amongst our top buying guide.

Huawei has managed to deliver the most luxurious, performant and long-lasting laptop we’ve seen since the Dell XPS 13. Granted, the company achieved such a design by emulating trendsetters rather closely, though none of its predecessors have been able to achieve quite this balance of function and form.

Sure, you’ll likely end up paying handsomely for such a complete experience, but the math currently ends up working out in Huawei’s favor, offering up capabilities that few of its closest competitors can muster for a similar price. Now, let’s get into the beautiful nitty gritty.

[Editor’s Note:What follows is an in-depth, hands-on review of the Huawei MateBook X Pro, including our full run of benchmarks. However, we will not be amending this review with a score or editorial awards until Huawei releases final pricing information for the UK, US and Australia. Stay tuned to this space.]

Price and availability

For reasons unknown, Huawei is not yet ready to discuss pricing of its newest laptop in any other currency than Euros. To that end, the MateBook X Pro costs €1,499 (about $1,850, £1,300 or AU$2350) to start, with an 8th-generation Intel Core i5 processor, 8GB of RAM, a 256GB solid-state drive (SSD) and Nvidia GeForce MW150 graphics inside.

From there, your next option is to bump up the spec sheet to double the amount of available storage as well as pump up the graphics option to an MX150 GPU for €1,699 (about $2,097, £1,515 or AU$2,667). Finally, the most powerful version of Intel’s mobile processor, the i7, while doubling the RAM costs you €1,899 (about $2,350 £1,670 or AU$3,000).

If we’re to take these estimated US and UK prices, then the MateBook X Pro looks like a veritable bargain next to the most expensive 13-inch MacBook Pro configuration that costs $2,299 (£2,219, AU$3,479). Meanwhile, the XPS 13 handily beats it in terms of value, offering the same general parts as the most expensive MateBook X Pro configuration for $1,999 (£1,649 AU$2,464).

Though, in either case, neither of these options offer the dedicated graphics that Huawei’s new laptop does.

Design

The MateBook X Pro’s design keeps the premium feel of its predecessor alive, featuring an aluminum unibody design with diamond-cut edges and a sandblast finish. This results in a laptop that undoubtedly looks luxe – and feels that way as well.

When closed, the MateBook X Pro is just 4.9mm (0.19 inches) at its thinnest end, and 14.6mm (0.57 inches) at its thickest. All the while, it weighs just 1.33kg (2.93 pounds), which – as Huawei is keen to point out – is lighter than the MacBook Air’s 1.35kg.

Clearly, this is a slim and light-enough laptop to comfortably carry around. Again, the MateBook X Pro comes in two colors, Space Gray and Mystic Silver, and both look gorgeous up close. Of course, you’ll have to get the priciest version if you want that silver color – at least in the US.

When using the MateBook X in the real world, the lightweight and portable chassis means it can comfortably be clasped in a hand while rushing from meeting to meeting. It also fits in most backpacks – and even some tablet compartments and sleeves. So, despite considerable power contained within, it remains incredibly mobile.

Another welcome touch is that the laptop opens without needing to hold down the bottom half. Simply wedge your thumb or finger under the top of the screen when closed, lift and, as if by Apple-magic, the laptop opens with no awkward clamshell fumbles.

There’s a full size keyboard that’s backlit and spill-proof, though we wish the backlighting had more fine control than just a few brightness levels. That said, the travel on these keys is plenty deep for the laptop’s awfully thin profile, and they are just punchy enough on the return from a press to present little to no learning curve from other premium laptops, namely the MacBook.

Beneath the deep-and-punchy keyboard rests the large trackpad – which Huawei says is the largest one found on a 14-inch laptop. After a bit of use, we can confidently say that the extra-sized trackpad only helps the experience, with Microsoft’s Precision Touchpad technology and certification resulting in strong palm detection. This keeps your palms from triggering touches of the trackpad while typing.

On either side of the keyboard are two top-firing, stereo speakers (for a total of four) that support Dolby Atmos, and it shows. Audio set at 80% volume is loud and impressively nuanced when playing music or movies. We can actually hear the sound travel across the four distinct audio channels.

Above the keyboard is the power button, which – like the MateBook X – has a built in fingerprint scanner for Windows Hello. This is an excellent idea, as it means you can turn on the laptop and sign into it with just a single touch. Huawei tells us that, from cold startup to logging into Windows 10, it takes just 7.8 seconds to start the machine – and just 6.6 seconds from hibernation. We’re getting similar numbers in our testing.

This is thanks to the fingerprint sensor being a hardware-level part, meaning it’s controlled directly by the processor, not by Windows 10 – of course, it still works with Windows Hello. It’s little touches like this that help Huawei’s laptop stand out from the competition.

Display

The 13.9-inch IPS (in-plane switching) screen now has impressively thin, 4.4mm bezels surrounding it. This keeps the overall size of the laptop down to just under 12 inches wide. Huawei claims that the MateBook X Pro is the world’s first ‘FullView’ notebook, with a 91% screen to body ratio.

In comparison, the original MateBook had a ratio of 84%. We’re serious fans of screens with tiny bezels, so by giving over so much space to its display, the MateBook X Pro is undoubtedly eye-catching.

In fact, the bezels are so small that Huawei came up with a unique placement for the MateBook X Pro’s webcam: it’s actually in the keyboard beneath a key with a camera icon on it. Pressing the key depresses a latch that lets the 720p camera appear.

This doesn’t really solve the whole ‘ChinCam’ problem we’ve seen on laptops like Dell XPS 13. Rather, it exacerbates the issue with this new webcam position creating an all new 'KnuckleCam' problem. Excited typing can result in rogue knuckles appearing on-screen and, unlike the camera on the XPS 13, the MateBook X Pro camera can't be tilted up or down.

That said, the ability to completely hide away the webcam is excellent for privacy. In this way it feels like a more elegant and clever solution other thin-bezel laptops.

Now, back to that display: it’s now a touchscreen with snappy response and Gorilla Glass protection to keep it from getting scratched. It also has a 3K (3,000 x 2,000) resolution, which leads to a 260 PPI (pixels per inch) pixel density. So, the display is plenty sharp, though you may notice that it is more ‘square’ than other laptops.

This is because it features a 3:2 aspect ratio, like the MateBook X before it, rather than the most common ratio of 16:9. So, it offers more vertical space than other laptops, which can help with productivity, though watching movies and TV on it will result in more pronounced black bars at the top and bottom of the display than most.

No matter what you use it for, the screen undoubtedly looks sharp and vibrant, with a 450 nit brightness able to combat some serious glare even at 50% brightness and 1,500:1 contrast ratio for seriously deep blacks.

Considering the spec listed before, that the MateBook X Pro absolutely flies through basic tasks shouldn’t be too surprising. The version here uses an Intel processor that is 40% faster than the previous model’s. Huawei is keen to point out its use of a U series CPU, rather than an M series, which is more often found in laptops of this size.

That point, coupled with Nvidia MX 150 graphics, leaves us with a laptop that’s prepared to take on nearly any major productivity task short of editing and rendering 4K media. The laptop keeps pace well enough with the comparably-specced Dell XPS 13, beating its Geekbench 4 Single-Core score and coming within the margin of error of most other benchmarks.

As for the 13-inch MacBook Pro, the MateBook X Pro handily squashed it in both our Geekbench 4 and Cinebench tests, proving how much stronger Apple’s leading laptop would have been had it waited a bit longer for 8th-generation Intel processors. Meanwhile the MateBook X Pro’s dedicated graphics chip means it can handle media editing and rendering better than either competing device without issue.

In short, the more holistic power profile within the MateBook X Pro makes it perhaps an even more alluring alternative to the Dell XPS 13 and MacBook Pro performance-wise, a surprising development.

Battery life

The wins don’t stop there. The MateBook X Pro is one of the longest-lasting Ultrabooks – much less Windows laptops in general – we’ve ever tested. At 6 hours and 12 minutes on the PCMark 8 battery test, this laptop beat Dell’s flagship by just under two hours.

Meanwhile, it outlasted both the XPS 13 and MacBook Pro by more than two hours and 90 minutes, respectively, in the TechRadar local video rundown test. We definitely didn’t see the day coming that would have a laptop outlast both the best Windows laptop around and Apple’s leading MacBook.

At this point, you’re looking at a laptop that’s not only more powerful than both the top 13-inch models for Windows and macOS, respectively, but one that also lasts longer. How much does this laptop cost again?

Software and features

While the MateBook X Pro does promise a Microsoft Signature Edition of Windows 10 on its latest laptop, Huawei did inject just one app into the operating system: Huawei PC Manager. This service allows for more instant wireless connection between it on the MateBook X Pro and Huawei phones.

The PC Manager tool also allows for Huawei Share, a sort of Apple AirDrop competitor that permits file sharing with nearby devices at speeds using the service up to 20 Mbps. It’s a fine enough feature, but requires for not only the user to buy all-in on Huawei devices and services, but all of his or her friends and co-workers, too – a tall order.

Beyond that, the only other marquee feature of the MateBook X Pro is its USB-C, 65W power adapter that houses a smart controller, allowing it to deliver just the right amount of voltage and amps depending on what type of device is plugged in. Better yet, for this laptop, it offers up fast-charging capabilities, so it will charge the MateBook X Pro faster than you can burn its battery down.

Early verdict

Frankly, we’re stunned by Huawei’s sophomore effort in the laptop category. In one fell swoop, the MateBook X Pro presents an overwhelming alternative to our favorite laptop, the Dell XPS 13, and the MacBook Pro.

From its slick, subtle design to its luxurious typing and navigating experience, and its powerhouse performance to its storied battery life – not to mention a sublime touchscreen – the Huawei MateBook X Pro is an incredible laptop. Its apparent flaws are few and far in between, like the lack of an SD card slot and webcam trick that’s clever, but flawed nevertheless.

All told, the MateBook X Pro may well be the answer we give readers and friends when they ask the broadest of questions: ‘what’s the best laptop?’ However, that all rides on the price that Huawei comes out with – stay tuned.

]]>http://www.techradar.com/reviews/huawei-matebook-x-proDell Latitude 5290 2-in-1http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/techradar/tech-reviews/~3/bhkhREXHfR8/dell-latitude-5290-2-in-1
http://www.techradar.com/reviews/dell-latitude-5290-2-in-1Dell’s Latitude is a workhorse 2-in-1 that doesn’t mind a little play, too. It’s expensive, though.Mon, 19 Mar 2018 19:00:38 +0000techradar.comNow that the tech sages have declared 2018 to be the year without another Surface Pro, Microsoft’s competitors are putting out new top-of-the-line 2-in-1s with the idea of making 2018 their year instead.

Enter the Dell Latitude 5290 2-in-1 (not to be confused with the Dell Latitude 5290 Business Laptop), an enterprise-oriented detachable device that the venerable Texas manufacturer hopes will capture some of that suddenly up for grabs 2-in-1 territory.

Design

The Latitude’s design follows the typical detachable 2-in-1 template: it has a deployable kickstand so the tablet portion can stand on its own, along with a magnetized type cover for easy tablet/laptop conversion, and an extra-large bezel and tactile rear panel so hands can easily grip it.

That said, the Latitude does bring some welcome wrinkles to the 2-in-1 blueprint. It has a nifty, intuitive take on the tablet kickstand – the leg auto deploys by holding the tablet at a 90 degree angle and pressing it into a flat surface.

Furthermore, the kickstand flexes a full 150 degrees, allowing for custom viewing angles and easy access to the micro-SIM and microSD card slots, which are cleverly, and discreetly, located around the back of the tablet.

The Latitude is also awash in enterprise-friendly ports and card slots. Most notably it boasts a Noble Wedge lock, smart card reader, NFC and – much kudos to Dell for this – a pair of DisplayPort over USB-C connectors. Thanks to this port twinning, users won’t have to choose between charging their Latitude and plugging in another device.

A magnet on the Latitude’s right-hand side secures the Dell Active Pen (sold separately for £60/$60) to the tablet, though we recommend tethering the stylus the old-fashioned way. The magnet simply isn’t strong enough to prevent the pen from being stripped off by an errant knock, especially if you transport the Latitude loose in a work bag.

Unfortunately the Latitude also suffers from some of the same flaws inherent to all detachable devices.

Firstly, any non-flat surface gives it the fits. Laps, beds, and so forth – they’ll send your Latitude toppling unless it stays perfectly still. Detachable 2-in-1’s are just not balanced – or built with a firm enough base – for true ‘anywhere’ usage.

Secondly, the screen will be afflicted by smudge marks. Despite claims of anti-smudge technology, the Latitude’s glass attracts fingerprints – so be prepared to wipe down your device regularly.

Specifications

The Latitude’s claim to hardware fame is its 8th-generation Intel Core i5 processor, which helped it achieve excellent scores in our benchmark tests as you’ll see shortly. Less exciting is its 8GB of DDR3 memory – that’s only just enough RAM to keep the Latitude from hiccupping during heavy, multi-tab, multi-program usage.

Aside from its processor, the Latitude’s other hardware highlight is 256GB of PCIe NVMe storage. That’s a solid amount of capacity and it’s a quiet and fast drive.

There are three cameras – 5MP, 8MP, and infrared – giving users the ability to video call with the boss, snap pics of Mr. Yum Yums the tabby, and login via Windows Hello (though hopefully not all at the same time). Last but not least – and especially important for enterprise users – the Latitude boasts dual-band wireless-AC 8265 Wi-Fi and Bluetooth 4.2.

Usage and performance

With integrated graphics, the Latitude isn’t much of an esports choice, but it’s not trying to court the gamer crowd anyway. It’s a workhorse: the Latitude galloped through our benchmarks and – thanks to its PCIe NVME SSD – made an especially good showing on CrystalDiskMark and Atto’s drive performance tests.

The Latitude gets top marks for its vibrant display, too. The screen’s sharp contrast and great viewing angles are real eye-savers, especially during marathon work sessions. And while other devices deliver more pixels, that doesn’t necessarily make them more impressive: higher resolutions are wasted on a 12-inch screen.

However, there are a few areas where the Latitude fails to make the grade.

Its battery only lasted a paltry 2 hours 49 minutes. Even Dell is a little red-faced about this, as the company suggests investing in its Power Bank Plus to extend the Latitude’s longevity away from a power socket. Of course, that adds more to the price tag (£97/$150) of an already costly device.

The Latitude’s keyboard is not as dysfunctional as the battery, but its small keys and paddling-pool-shallow levels of travel make long typing sessions difficult, a no-no for such an enterprise-oriented device. The touchpad and touchscreen, on the other hand, feel intuitive and precise.

Competition

The Latitude’s obvious competitor is Microsoft’s Surface Pro. It has a display with more pixels, and definitely has more of a marketing budget than Dell’s new 2-in-1, but its older CPU (7th-gen) and limited selection of ports and card slots make it less appealing to business users.

Microsoft’s detachable device is meant for the mass-market and its lower-end configurations are priced as such (it starts at £624/$799). However, note that buyers do have to purchase the Type Cover (£149/$130) separately.

The Latitude’s closest competitor could be HP’s Elite x2 1012 G2. Also built for business, the Elite x2 has similar port and card reader offerings, as well as security features, and is a bit cheaper (£1,109/$1,439). The Elite x2, however, is missing the Latitude’s clever kickstand and 8th-generation Intel processor.

At £1,011 ($1,250) the Lenovo Miix 720 is another (relatively) cheap alternative to the Latitude, but it has last year’s hardware (7th-gen processor), a larger form factor, less options when it comes to ports and no fingerprint reader or micro-SIM card slot.

Our business take

The Latitude’s enterprise value proposition is its security features. The device is FIPS 140-2 and TCG certified, offers multiple biometric methods for logging in (facial and fingerprint recognition), plus it encrypts and sequesters data via Dell’s Data Protection and ControlVault.

Sales staff will find the Latitude 5290 particularly appealing: its detachability is perfect for intimate presentations, the brushed aluminum finish and auto deploy kickstand ooze a cool professionalism, and its security will keep private client information under wraps.

Final verdict

Even as detachable 2-in-1s go, the Latitude 5290 isn’t cheap. But Dell’s theory is that your boss will pick up the tab because of the great value the device brings to businesses. And in terms of performance and professionalism – a chintzy device it most certainly isn’t – the Latitude delivers.

But is it comfortable to use? The keyboard is shallow, and its coolest feature – the detachability of the tablet – makes it unwieldy to use on non-flat surfaces. On an overall level, the Latitude isn’t uncomfortable to use, but it could be more lap-friendly considering its cost.

Any business with a lot client-facing staff should consider the Latitude 5290 2-in-1. Even if it won’t replace the good old traditional laptop completely, Dell’s 2-in-1 is perfect for the travelling professional.

]]>http://www.techradar.com/reviews/dell-latitude-5290-2-in-1Garmin Forerunner 645 Musichttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/techradar/tech-reviews/~3/c7V6TSPc23o/garmin-forerunner-645
http://www.techradar.com/reviews/garmin-forerunner-645Music and running go together, so we're glad to see the Garmin finally has a smartwatch with music integrated.Mon, 19 Mar 2018 18:50:16 +0000techradar.com

We’ve spent over a week running, cycling and generally testing with the Garmin Forerunner 645 Music, but this thing is pretty in-depth and we need to give the battery a few more cycles before we give a definitive verdict.

That said, we’ve got a lot of findings to share with you already - this fancy new watch adds in music, something that’s been missing from Garmin’s fitness trackers so far, and we’ve been pushing that pretty extensively.

That’s the main USP of the Forerunner 645 Music - the idea being that you can dispense with your phone and still have something that can tell you where you’ve been, how fast you’re going, when to push and slow down and still keep you entertained with music.

In this sense it’s Garmin playing catch-up to the Apple Watch 3 and Android Wear smartwatches, which all have integrated storage for music - but bringing its immense ability at fitness tracking.

On top of that you’re getting a top fitness tracker, something that not only counts steps, but sleep, stress and overall level of health, as well as being able to set up complex workouts too.

Garmin Forerunner 645 Music price and release date

Here’s the thing that will probably stop many in their tracks: the Garmin Forerunner 645 Music is going to cost around £399 / $399 (around AU$520) - which is a lot of any kind of running watch.

You can get a model without music for £350 / $350 (around AU$440) - but that would really strip it of the main USP.

It’s already available, with the release date hitting in February 2018.

Design, battery life and music

One of the striking things about the Garmin Forerunner 645 is the design - the stylish metal around the 1.2-inch face has drawn some admiring looks so far, and certainly elevates it as one of the top Garmin watches in the fashion stakes.

It’s also lightweight, and the screen is as legible as most Garmin watches, with the transflective technology making it easy to read in most lights.

The battery life is something that worries us a little bit - this watch has a similar cost to the Forerunner 935, but has half the battery life. Five hours on GPS isn’t a lot for many Garmin watches, although we only lost 22% on a two-and-a-half hour run.

At the moment it’s lasting around 4-5 days with everyday activity, but we’re still waiting for the battery life to settle.

The fact you can sync millions of tracks from the iHeartRadio or Deezer to the Garmin Forerunner 645 is cool - the fact that neither service is available yet is not. There’s no word on Spotify, but we’d imagine the cost of hooking up with that brand is rather high at the moment.

The only way to get music on here is through a connection to your computer - if you’ve actually got any MP3s still kicking around you can sync them across, but it’s a slightly complex process.

The interface for playing music is fine, although navigating through using buttons can be a little fiddly. It’s nice having music on your runs, but until you can sync your Spotify playlists across, the Music element of the Forerunner 645 isn’t going to entice a lot of people.

Garmin Pay is also enabled, so you can use the watch as a contactless payment system, but in the UK where we’re reviewing the watch there aren’t many banks supported so we couldn’t test this.

The fitness elements of this watch are extensive; it seems that Garmin is now making most of its devices multi-sport, as you can track running, cycling, skiing, swimming and more.

It’s not quite fully-featured, but we found that the GPS lock was incredibly fast - one of the best we’ve seen on a watch.

It’s hard to comment on the activity tracking, simply because Garmin has had this nailed for years and it’s the same now. It might not be the most accessible for the absolute novice, but if you’ve got a modicum of confidence in the fitness space you’ll feel thoroughly looked after.

Early verdict

The Garmin Forerunner 645 Music is a nice step forward for the brand, but it’s more style over function. Battery life should be better for the price (and will, perhaps, improve with testing) and the musical element is too basic without the streaming services on board.

It looks great but for the price it might not be enough, especially as it’s been released without all the features fully ready.

]]>http://www.techradar.com/reviews/garmin-forerunner-645Sony Bravia X900F Series (XBR-65X900F)http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/techradar/tech-reviews/~3/NXVZjvOR6n4/sony-bravia-x900f-series
http://www.techradar.com/reviews/sony-bravia-x900f-seriesSony scored a big hit in 2017 with its X900E 4K TV series. It’s hardly surprising, then, to find the Japanese brand out to do the same with the all-new 2018 X900F series. Mon, 19 Mar 2018 02:20:06 +0000techradar.comWhen it comes to handling the TV world’s brilliant new high dynamic range (HDR) technology, where you put your LCD TV’s backlights matters.

Put them around the edge of the screen like most TVs do, and you’re going to struggle to ensure that all that HDR brightness only appears in the parts of the picture where it’s supposed to appear.

Put the LEDs right behind the screen and ensure that different zones of those LEDs can output different amounts of light at any given moment, however, and you have the potential for a much more controlled, dynamic, immersive HDR performance.

Cue the Sony Bravia XBR-65X900F or, as it's known in the UK, the Sony KD-65XF9005.

Despite being pretty affordable by modern 65-inch TV standards, this 4K-resolution, HDR-capable TV takes the direct lighting with local dimming approach rather than the edge-lighting approach favored by pretty much all of its similarly priced rivals.

Even better, it partners this great backlight starting point with Sony’s most powerful video processing engine, and a significant boost in HDR-friendly brightness compared with the 2017 Sony X900E Series models it replaces.

Design

While there are many things to like about the 65X900F, we're not entirely convinced its design is one of them.

The frame around the screen is neat, tidy and trim, in line with current trends. It also benefits from a cute ‘brushed metal’ effect finish. Oddly, though, Sony has opted to rest this pleasing frame on top of a pair of rather comical, oversized feet.

As well as adding a touch of the absurd to an otherwise serious look, the angle and position of these feet means you’ll need to find a fairly wide bit of furniture to rest the TV on.

Design TL;DR: For the most part, the 65XF9005 is a sharp-looking, space saving, robustly built TV. Those feet, though…

Smart TV (Android TV)

Sony is continuing to use the Android TV platform to provide smart features on its mid-range and premium TVs. This means a number of things.

First, having Android TV means you get lots of content. Android TV carries many hundreds of game, information, music and video streaming apps - including the key Netflix, Amazon and YouTube platforms.

In the UK you also get the catch-up TV services for the UK’s main terrestrial broadcasters, accessible via a YouView app that also lets you search for shows via an electronic programme guide that can scroll back as well as forwards.

The Android TV system supports built-in Chromecasting, and recently had support for Google’s Voice Assistant software added.

This still can’t save Android TV from being a typically frustrating smart TV experience, though. For starters, its full-screen menus look cluttered and confusing, and only support minimal amounts of customisation. It also erroneously seems to think in its layout that people will be more interested in playing often third-rate games on their TV than streaming video. And it’s horribly prone to needing regular and often pretty sizeable software updates.

It runs sluggishly and the processing power required to run it means the TV’s main operating menus can also react rather slowly to your remote control commands.

While the Netflix and Amazon apps both support high dynamic range and 4K streams, the YouTube app on our test sample strangely remains locked in HD SDR.

Finally, despite Android TV being able to learn the sort of apps and content you use the most and recommend personalized content options accordingly, it's less clever than some alternative modern smart TV systems we've used.

Smart TV TL;DR: Android TV continues to feel like a cumbersome and unhelpful smart TV platform, with an interface that feels more a hindrance than a help. Fortunately it’s helped out in the UK, at least, by the inclusion of a separate YouView app for easy access to key catch-up TV services.

HD/SDR Performance

We’re in serious ‘wow’ territory with the X900F’s HD and SDR picture performance.

Sony has fitted the series with its X1 Extreme video processor, rather than the standard X1 processor used in last year’s X900E models. A key component of this (40%) more powerful Extreme processor is that it carries a unique twin-database system for adding detail to and removing noise from sub-4K sources.

This worked wonders on all the HD Blu-rays and even DVDs we played on the X900F, making them look far more detailed - genuinely 4K-like in Blu-ray’s case - without exaggerating any source noise they might contain. For the second year in a row, there’s just no other mainstream TV technology out there today that can upscale HD to 4K as well as Sony’s X1 Extreme processor.

The same is true for the X900F’s system for converting standard dynamic range (SDR) images to HDR. Similar ‘upgrading’ is now offered by most other TV brands, but there’s a naturalism and subtlety to Sony’s HDR upgrade (which introduces both enriched colors and an expanded brightness range) that makes the resulting images uniquely consistent and convincing.

Sony is so confident about its HDR upgrade system, in fact, that it’s applied by default to the majority of the TV’s picture presets. That said, if you DO turn the HDR upscaling off (by selecting the True Cinema mode), SDR pictures still look beautiful. Colors remain exceptionally rich but also subtle; light still looks beautifully handled; and dark scenes continue to be rich in black level and shadow detail.

In fact, dark scenes in some ways look better than they do in Sony’s HDR upgrade mode, since there’s no hint of the slight ‘blooming’ of light around stand-out bright objects that occasionally materialises with the HDR ‘upgrading’ processing active.

For us, the benefits of the HDR upscaling mean it’s pretty much always worth sticking with. But rest assured that if you want to watch SDR images as they were originally designed to be seen, the 65X900F/65XF9005 does a terrific job of that too.

HD/SDR Performance TL;DR: Despite its mid-range price point, the X900F/XF90 delivers a high-end performance with HD and SDR content thanks to state of the art HD-to-4K and SDR-to-HDR conversion processing.

4K/HDR Performance

For the most part, the 65XF9005 does an excellent job with 4K sources: Sony’s X1 Extreme processing and Triluminos color management system joins with some outstanding light precision and noise management to get as much detail impact as possible from native 4K pictures.

Underlining the 4K clarity is another picture feature that Sony excels at: motion reproduction. Sony’s Motionflow processing has long done a class-leading job of reducing judder and blur in LCD TV playback. But for the X900F/XF90 Sony has taken this a big step further with a new X-Motion Clarity innovation.

This leverages the localised brightness boosting made possible by the TV's direct LED lighting and local dimming to enable the TV to insert black frames into the picture (a technique long considered to give the most natural motion reproduction) without the picture suffering the dramatic brightness loss black frame insertion usually causes.

It's well worth playing around with the Custom motion mode - especially this mode’s Clearness setting, which appears to be directly tied to the level of Black Frame Insertion. Setting Clearness to ‘1’ from its default zero position costs you around 100 nits of brightness, but motion undeniably looks more natural. Which in turn makes the sharpness of the TV’s 4K pictures look even more impressive.

As expected, its use of direct lighting and local dimming is at the heart of the X900F/XF90's success. It enables the TV to produce bright HDR highlights against impressively dark backgrounds with far more punch and far less disruption from unwanted backlight inconsistencies than you’d get with any similarly bright edge-lit LCD alternative.

There’s markedly much more punch in the bright, color-rich parts of the TV’s HDR images than you got with last year’s X900E/XE90 models. Our measurements suggest it achieves around 1000 nits of brightness over a 10% white, HDR window - that’s 200 nits more than you got with the X900E/XE90. As a result, it delivers a much more undiluted HDR experience than its predecessor.

When we said earlier that there’s ‘far less disruption from unwanted backlight inconsistencies than you’d get with any edge-lit LCD alternative’, this is not the same as saying there’s no unwanted backlight clouding at all: During really extreme HDR shots, such as a candle flickering in a darkened room, or a brightly lit window in an otherwise dark house, you can usually clearly see a gentle circle of extra light as much as three or four inches across stretching out around the bright object.

It’s true, too, that if you have to watch the TV from an angle of more than 20 degrees off axis - either horizontally or vertically - then the light ‘blooming’ around stand-out bright objects becomes much more noticeable.

However, that said, the sort of images that cause blooming backlighting on the 65XF9005/65X900F are very rare in normal viewing conditions. You can also greatly reduce how distracting the blooming is by keeping a little light in your room, rather than going for a full-on black-out.

While very high-end (AKA expensive) direct-lit LCD TVs with far more individually controlled LED dimming zones than the X900F/XF90 may suffer with much less obvious backlight ‘blooming’, it’s hard from past experience to imagine other similarly priced rivals being able to deliver similar amounts of HDR punch and brightness with so little backlight clouding. They’ll either have to be less bright, or else exhibit much larger areas of backlight inconsistency.

Sound

While the 65XF9005 isn’t by any means the best sounding TV I’ve heard, it’s still a pleasant surprise compared with many of Sony’s other recent models.

The soundstage spreads a good distance beyond the TV’s frame, creating a compelling, detailed, clean and immersive wall of sound. Dialogue sounds more convincingly locked to the screen than it does with many LCD TVs, thanks to the way it seems to sit vertically higher in the mix than usual. Plus there’s a really nice, open, uncompressed feel to the mid-range.

The result of all this is that the 65XF9005/65X900F does a pretty handy job of hiding its one weakness: a fairly limited supply of bass.

Sound quality TL;DR: Despite not delivering much bass, the TV’s speakers are powerful, dynamic and detailed enough to produce an enjoyable soundstage large enough to keep up with the epic scale of its pictures.

Other panels to ponder

The 65XF9005/65X900F is the first 2018 TV we’ve seen from any brand, let alone Sony, so we’ll have to look back to 2017 for rivals.

The most compelling alternative set would probably be one of LG’s 2017 OLED TVs - either the OLED55B7 or OLED55C7. Both use OLED technology to deliver beautiful black levels without backlight blooming. However, you’ll only be able to get 55-inch screens without spending much more than the 65-inch 65XF9005/65X900F costs, and the OLED pictures don’t look quite as bright as those of the Sony.

From an LCD perspective, the most compelling alternative is Samsung’s Q7F QLED. This beautifully designed set costs slightly less than the 65XF9005/65X900F, and delivers a mighty 1500 nits of peak brightness. Its screen enjoys a stunning filter, too, that means the picture loses practically none of its impact even when viewed in a very bright room.

However, delivering so much brightness from an edge LED lighting system does mean that the Q7F can’t deliver black levels as deep and free of backlighting clouding issues as Sony's 65XF9005/65X900F can.

Verdict

Short and sweet, the 65XF9005/65X900F is a brilliant mid-priced TV. Every one of the improvements Sony has introduced over and above last year’s already excellent X900E series - better processing, more brightness, slightly more backlight dimming zones, improved motion performance - delivers the goods, resulting in picture quality that humbles many more expensive TVs.

Its Android TV system and some generally minor backlight clouding stop it short of perfection, but it’s hard to imagine any similarly priced upcoming 65-inch rival getting the better of it.

]]>http://www.techradar.com/reviews/sony-bravia-x900f-seriesOculus Rifthttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/techradar/tech-reviews/~3/4ATR5CQt9JE/review
http://www.techradar.com/reviews/gaming/gaming-accessories/oculus-rift-1123963/reviewOculus Rift's permanent price drop might make this the best time ever to invest in a virtual reality headset.Sat, 17 Mar 2018 00:12:00 +0000techradar.comIt's hard to believe the Oculus Rift is already celebrating its second birthday. It was one of the biggest launches of 2016 and yet, by most accounts, it was still early days. The years since have provided an opportunity for the headset to stretch its wings a bit – a number of high-profile games have launched on the hardware, and it's received motion controllers in the form of Oculus Touch.

[Update: Oculus Rift could be just a few months away from receiving a standalone companion. The latest rumor is that the Oculus Go, an all-in-one VR headset that doesn't require a phone or PC to operate, will launch at Facebook's F8 developer conference in early May. We already know the Oculus Go price; it'll cost $199 (about £150 / AU$255). If it releases to consumers on May 1, then shoppers will have a cheaper, portable alternative to the Oculus Rift, albeit one that's much less powerful.]

To make matters even better, it's also received a permanent price cut: $399/£399 (around AU$640) for the headset, two sensors and the Touch Controllers. That's a far cry away from the Rift's closest competitor, the HTC Vive, which comes in at an also-reduced price of $499 or £499 (around AU$615).

This price drop could be interpreted in a number of ways. In one sense, it could point to the fact that Oculus Rift sales have been less than what Facebook expected them to be – and the price drop is an attempt to drum up those figures. Another perfectly fine interpretation is that Facebook desperately wants this hardware in customers' hands – even if that means selling it at a loss.

But you're not here for speculation, right? You're here because you're interested in reading about one of the world's coolest, most bleeding-edge technology: VR. Now, after nearly two years with the Oculus Rift, the HTC Vive and PlayStation VR, can we finally say 'virtual reality is here to stay'?

OK, before we dive too deep into the virtues of VR, let's take a moment to talk about the two most important aspects to consider before deciding to buy a Rift of your own: price and the minimum PC requirements.

If you've been following the virtual reality scene you probably know this already, but the Oculus Rift requires a wired connection to a PC in order to have enough power to drive two 1080x1200 resolution images to each lens inside the headset. It can't just be any old run-of-the-mill PC, either – you're going to need a top of the line gaming PC to enjoy everything the Rift has to offer.

Originally, the minimum specs put out by Oculus called for an Intel Core i5 4590 or equivalent processor, 8GB of RAM and an NVIDIA GTX 970 or AMD Radeon 290 video card. Most of the hardcore gaming community might already have these components on hand, but if you're a casual gamer or currently more of a PC layman, these parts will be the first of two costly investments you need to pay for upfront.

Recently, however, that minimum spec has been brought down to an Intel i3-6100, instead of the more expensive Intel i5-4590, and GPUs can now start from the Nvidia GTX 960 from the recommended 970.

That change brings down the cost of the system required to play VR games to around $499 by Oculus's estimates, and says that it's teaming up with Cyberpower to bring pre-made rigs like that to the public.

The other expenditure is the Oculus Rift itself, duh.

When paired with the proper hardware, the Oculus Rift is far superior to PlayStation VR, and light years ahead of Google Cardboard and Samsung Gear VR, both of which only rely on the power of your cell phone to gaze into the plane of virtual reality. It's not quite as immersive or as capable as the HTC Vive, but I'll touch on that point more in a bit.

So, what exactly are you buying? What does the Oculus Rift do?

How the Oculus Rift works

I've tried my best to explain virtual reality in words and, on multiple occasions, have completely and utterly failed. At best all I can do is paint a half-cocked image in hopes to inspire you to go out and find a friend or coworker with an Oculus Rift of their own who'd be kind enough to let you give it a whirl. Here goes nothing.

Imagine standing on the ledge of a 100-story building. Imagine looking down at the street below you. Imagine the tightening of your stomach and the sense of dread that you might, at any second, fall to your demise.

Now imagine taking one step forward.

You're falling and the world is whipping before you. You're petrified. But you also feel alive. The second right before you hit the ground is the worst – your brain is actually prepared for the moment by dumping adrenaline into your system as a mild painkiller.

But while all this is happening, you haven't actually moved. You've been sitting in a chair in your own home, staring into a screen. Your biometrics have changed, but, geographically speaking, you're exactly where you were 10 minutes ago.

This is what it's like to use virtual reality, to get the experience of being somewhere else in a different time, a different place, sometimes as far as an alien world, all without ever leaving your home.

This product is the fruit of a four-year research project that launched on Kickstarter, made $2 million, then was purchased by one of the most powerful tech companies in the world, Facebook. The Oculus Rift shipping these days is the first commercially available unit – the fourth evolution of the headset that started back in 2012 with Developer Kit 1.

The latest iteration of the headset is significantly better than any of the previous development kits. It's easier to setup thanks to an intuitive program that you're prompted to download when you plug it in, and it takes less technical knowhow to install games and troubleshoot when things go awry.

Like other virtual reality headsets, the Oculus RIft has the arduous task of completely immersing you in a video game by producing two images simultaneously. It does this by hooking into the back of your graphics card's HDMI port and using a camera to track your head movement. You can either sit or stand while wearing the headset, whichever you find more comfortable. But, unlike the HTC Vive, you won't be able to use the hardware inside the box to actually walk around at all (what we commonly refer to as "room-scale VR").

What you'll get inside every Oculus Rift box, however, is the headset itself, the Oculus Sensor, a small Oculus Remote that can be used to control videos and change the volume on the headset, a Xbox One Wireless Controller with 2 AA batteries, an Xbox One controller adapter and extender and Lucky's Tale, a platforming game that is best compared to a 360-degree version of Super Mario Bros. If you pre-ordered the Rift, it also came with EVE: Valkyrie Founder's Pack.

Once you've plugged the headset into the HDMI port on your GPU, the two USB cables from the headset and sensor to two USB 3.0 ports on your PC and the Xbox One controller adapter into a USB 2.0 port on your PC, you're ready to start the short and simple setup process, which only takes about 10 minutes.

What you'll find when you're done is a library of about 100 titles that are longer than anything found on the HTC Vive. I've played a good deal of them, and while some were better than others, there weren't any that I felt were a waste of time or money. I'll cover them in more detail on the next page but, in the broadest of strokes, the Rift is a fun gaming system, even if it's not number one right now.

It's almost scary how far the Oculus Rift has come in such a short period of time.

The headset we tested just two years ago felt rough, cheap and borderline shoddy. It didn't track well and trying to get lag-free gameplay – even on a powerhouse gaming rig – was just short of impossible.

The final consumer version of the headset on the other hand is an elegant, sleek and, dare I say, stylish black brick you stick on your face. You may not look great wearing it, but the actual hardware can't be faulted for aesthetics.

When you first hold it, it's not weighty – in fact, it almost has a hollow feel, like all the weight has been put into the chassis and there's nothing but glass and thin film inside. Put it on, however, and those expectations of fluffy weightlessness will all go away.

When you're sitting down, the visor portion will weigh heavy on the front of your head. It's not something you notice immediately, but something you'll feel in your neck the longer you're immersed in your new virtual world. Thankfully, it doesn't necessarily dig in thanks to dense foam, but when it's tightened to the proper point, it's a snug fit. There are foam cushions on the back portion of the strap, too, so the back of your head rests in a cushy cradle.

The straps are a bit on the rigid side. They're made from bendable plastic that has some give, but overall holds its shape. There's velcro located on each strap that you use to adjust the position of the headset on your face.

These straps are absolutely vital as the Rift needs to be positioned properly on your face, otherwise the focus in the VR experience is off. This will happen if the headset is hanging a little loose or isn't centered, creating a blurred effect. Too tight, and while the headset is secure and the focus generally spot on, it tends to be uncomfortable. When this happened, it never got to the point where I needed to take the headset off to escape the discomfort, but it ached slightly, and left a headset-shaped impression on my face.

The opposite problem isn't good, either. When it's too loose, gaps allow light to come through from underneath the faceplate. Light will peek through and games will suddenly lose some of their immersiveness when you can see your hands working on the Xbox controller.

But sight is just one of the senses that needs to be transformed to feel fully immersed in virtual reality. The other, as you might guess, is hearing.

To address this, Oculus includes a pair of small ear pads that sit flush on the side of the headset. They can be rotated to sit directly on top of the ear, or flipped up when someone needs your attention back in the real world. I find, for the most part, that the headphones provided with the Rift work well. They offer 3D surround sound and have enough clarity to clearly hear all the in-game audio cues.

The only real problem I had with the headphones is that they randomly disconnect from time to time. I'll be in the middle of a game when, all of a sudden, the sound completely cuts out.

However, like the HTC Vive, the Oculus Rift allows you to use your own headphones instead of forcing a pair on you. I picked a pair of Creative Sound Blaster H5s due to their padding and excellent sound quality, and using an external pair of cans eliminated any issues I had with the sound cutting out. You can plug the headphones into your computer's audio jack or, if you're sitting too far from your PC, straight into the 3.5mm jack on the Xbox One controller.

The other benefit of using your own pair of headphones, especially one with a volume slider on the side or in the cord, is that it makes it easier to manage the volume when it's too loud or too soft. (Though, admittedly, it's almost always the former.)

However, Oculus recently introduced a third option into the mix – Oculus Earphones. These in-ear earbuds replace the on-ear pads that shipped with the original system and promise VR-compatible drivers for more immersive experiences and better noise isolation for only $49.

Another piece of the puzzle here is the Xbox One controller. Now, there's nothing inherently wrong with Microsoft's excellent gamepad – as far as controllers go, it's probably the best.

That said, virtual reality is no place for a standard controller. There are a few titles that feel natural with a controller – Lucky's Tale and Pinball FX VR are two that pop to mind – but that leaves about three dozen games that desperately need Touch controllers to be truly enjoyable.

With the Xbox One controller, games in first-person that use the left thumbstick to move create a sort of cognitive dissonance: it feels like you're moving, but your body is just sitting there, creating a sinking feeling in your stomach. The Rift isn't anywhere close to Nintendo's Virtual Boy system that caused seizures back in the '90s, but expect to get varying degrees of nausea while trying out the different titles.

The last important part is the long strand of cables connecting the headset to the PC. It comes out the rear of the headset and curves over your back or shoulder, so you can then hide it behind your chair. When you're sitting or standing, the cord doesn't get in the way, but if you're attempting to go for complete Matrix-style immersion, it's something you can constantly feel.

Performance and content library

OK, so far everything we've talked about applies to every Oculus Rift setup out there. Here's where we start to venture into "your miles may vary" territory.

What I've found, using a properly spec'd PC, is that performance is rock-solid. I never noticed a screen tear or a dropped frame in any of the games I played. That speaks volumes about the kind of quality control Oculus is exerting on the games that come to its svelte storefront, and again how far this hardware has come in four short years.

Tracking, done through the included Oculus Sensor, is fairly sturdy, too. You're able to turn your body more than 180 degrees and it will still recognize what you're doing. The sensor sits about 10 inches above your desk and can be tilted up or down, depending on what position you're currently in.

Take off the headset and the visor shuts off. Pick it up and put it on, and the screen will light back up. The external and internal sensors are pretty smart, thankfully, meaning you won't need to manually switch the headset on when you want to use it.

What the sensor can't track, at least when you're not holding the Touch controllers, are your hands. And that's a deal breaker.

I can't tell you how many times I wish the Rift shipped with Touch Controllers while playing games on the headset. Using a controller to move a bumper in air hockey simply feels unnatural. Making them an optional upgrade for the many thousands who already pre-ordered and own an Oculus Rift is a major faux pas.

There's a level of intuition that comes from using your hands. You know how to throw a ball, how to climb a rock wall and shake hands in real life. Translating the most basic of movements to a controller is imperfect at best and convoluted at worst, especially if you're someone who doesn't frequently use an Xbox One controller.

Moreover, because every game seems to be shoehorned to work with a controller, it feels like you could take almost any game on the Oculus storefront and port it over to an Xbox One without actually losing anything.

And while some of those games are really fun, immersive experiences, some of them – even the first-party titles – are plain gimmicky. Like looking into a 2016 version of our childhood Viewfinder, animated images will run up to you, roar in your face or threaten you to elicit a psychological response. It's a shallow parlor trick, similar to watching the first movies in 3D.

This is made up for, somewhat, by the huge selection of well thought out titles. All the games you've been drooling over are here: EVE Valkyrie, Elite Dangerous and ADR1FT are all available on the store, with plenty more to come sooner rather than later. Even more exciting, though, are that there are plenty of games that work with the Rift that aren't on the store, including family-favorite Minecraft.

Oculus sorts games by how much motion there is in the game, and how likely it is to make your stomach churn. There are three set levels: comfortable, moderate and intense. Comfortable games barely require moving your head and, if you do, you do so slowly. Moderate steps it up a notch. You'll either need to move more quickly or be faced with more moving objects. Finally, intense games will probably be the ones that do you in. These stick you on the side of a mountain or floating around haphazardly in space; they're more visceral of experiences, but ones that are more likely to provoke anxiety and induce nausea, too.

As this is a new medium, pricing for said games is all over the place. Some games are appropriately priced in the $4.99-$9.99 space, while others come in at $40 or $50 (about £35.37, AU$66.57) for what are essentially extended demos. As of right now there's also no way to try any of the games before you buy them, which means you'll need to make a leap of faith when purchasing.

Speaking of payment, Oculus will prompt you to enter your credit card information as soon as you have your system setup, but will allow you to skip past it if you're not quite ready to hand over your digits sight unseen.

Switching between one game/movie/app and the next is a relatively painless process. Simply press the jewel button on the center of the Xbox controller, select "exit" and you'll be returned to the home screen – in this case, a swanky living room replete with a fireplace, a couch and high-res pillows that throws a standard Xbox-looking interface in the middle of the room. (I'm pointing out the ridiculous nature of having a domestic-looking home screen here, obviously, but the interface that you use to peruse the storefront is actually very well designed.)

While you're able to buy games without ever leaving the confines of the luxurious home screen, some titles require you to take off the headset to complete the installation. And, yes, in practice it's just as annoying as it sounds.

Out of all the questions I've been asked over the past two weeks as I tested out the Rift, the most frequent ones are, "What is it like to spend a few hours in virtual reality?" and "Will it make me sick?"

Well, for starters, I should probably point out that even though games, movies and images are in high-resolution, you'd never struggle to tell the difference between what you're seeing on the Oculus Rift and what you're used to seeing in the real world.

That's not to say it breaks the immersion when you're in a VR world or even that it's overly grainy or pixelated – it's not. But objects in games aren't always completely clear when you really look at them. Now, that's a different story for local media played inside the headset via a virtual TV set up in a faux-living room, but in reality, I'm not sure putting a 1080p image on a $600 headset is a feature worth writing home about.

At this stage, at least, it's easy to tell the virtual world from the real one. For some people, that might make the Rift come off as more of a novelty, like Nintendo's Wii, rather than the ground-breaking innovation that all those critics I mentioned at the beginning see it as.

As for the question about feeling sick while using virtual reality?

The short and sweet answer is yes, it probably will make you sick. Some of you, even the most hardcore of hardcore who play games for seven or eight hours a day, might feel like the world has been pulled out under your feet when you step into virtual reality.

Motion sickness and building a tolerance to VR

According to Oculus, if you want to stay in virtual reality for more than a few minutes, you're going to need to build a tolerance.

The first time I tried VR, I felt very sick. Only by subjecting myself to the feelings of disassociation, anxiety and paralyzing overwhelmingness that can be experienced when you put on a virtual reality headset over multiple occasions could I finally overcome this feeling and start to actually enjoy VR.

Your body isn't used to feeling disconnected to the visual stimuli it's receiving. Even if you game for hours and hours per day, you still are sitting in the real world, periodically removing your gaze from the television to look at your cellphone or interact with another human being. In virtual reality, the only things you see are the screen and the objects on it, yet you can't physically interact with them. This leads to the feeling of disconnection and resulting nausea.

However, once you get your space legs, there are still two big problems you have to face.

The first is that no matter what position you are in, as long as your arms and hands aren't represented in-game, you're forever going to feel a pang of disassociation whenever you look down at your body.

The second problem is that, while I enjoyed every second I spent in virtual reality, the transition of coming back to the real world was one that I found especially difficult. Without dramatizing the emotions, I felt as though I wasn't all there when I took off the helmet. The closest feeling I can pick out is the one where you look at yourself in the mirror and don't really understand the person looking back at you.

You're still you, but it doesn't feel like you at first.

As disconcerting as they may sound, these side-effects don't actually concern me based on previous experience, and I'll keep to my habits of extended use after I'm done writing this review. I've played video games on CRT TVs long enough to know that, while strange, these secondary effects do fade in time without leaving behind permanent damage.

The future of the Oculus Rift and VR in general

Even though you've spent the last few minutes reading the 4,000 words or so I've written detailing how games work, what virtual reality is like and what you can expect from the Oculus Rift when the company finally ships yours – seriously people, if you're still waiting, cancel your order and go to the store to buy one – there's still more to talk about.

Oculus has amazing plans for the Rift. It could very well be the next evolution of Facebook. We might one day hold meetings in virtual reality. I mean, it has a microphone built-in, so there's absolutely nothing stopping Oculus from enabling such a feature next week. (Actually, Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg showed off this exact functionality at October's Oculus Connect developer conference. Check it out!)

You might one day use it as a therapeutic tool, letting the hardware transport you to a beach where you can meditate. There are plans to use it as a gateway to music festivals, like South by Southwest and Coachella, as well as live concerts and sports games.

There are even porn companies that are shooting 360-degree videos that you can watch on devices like the Oculus Rift. (If you're into that kind of stuff, we have a great article about it written by my colleagues, Michelle Fitzsimmons and James Peckham.)

I guess what I'm trying to say is that there's a lot of potential here, and once we learn how to tap into it better by becoming native VR users, it's only going to get better.

I'm still not convinced the Oculus RIft is the all-encompassing "future of entertainment" that others have labeled it as, but I'm optimistic that it might earn that title in the coming weeks, months and years.

I've tried to avoid the direct comparison as long as I could, but at this point in the review, I just need to come out and say it: Oculus is a smart, if at times somewhat gimmicky, introduction to virtual reality ... but it's not the best headset on the market.

Even though it pioneered the space, invested millions in developers and development and has a partnership with one of the foremost companies in the world, Oculus can't hold a candle to the HTC Vive, a system that not only has touch controllers in the box, but also sensors capable of room-scale VR that allow you walk around to naturally explore your virtual space in there too.

But, if you're deadset on Oculus, the Rift has similar technology if you're willing to pay a bit extra. The second Oculus Sensor will give you the ability to get up off of your chair and use your legs as well as your arms and developers will use the new technology to create a slew of more interesting and immersive titles. The Touch Controllers, as we've said in their own dedicated review, are nothing short of fantastic. They feel great in the hand, and improve gameplay tenfold.

That said, even though it's not the absolute best headset on the market, the story of Oculus is and always will be an awe-inspiring one. Oculus has stuck to its vision, even when those early prototypes were questionable and the demos nearly too laggy to bear. In myriad ways, it was wrought from pure imagination, created an entirely new industry from scratch and built out a platform that could one day fulfill the promises sci-fi films and novels made us when they showed us the Holodeck in its various forms for the first time.

The consumer-ready Rift is a lovely piece of hardware. But it's more than just a pretty headset: Oculus has built a whole ecosystem for its baby, from the sound of the built-in headphones to the games to the proprietary Touch Controllers.

As soon as you put on the Rift, you are transported to a whole new world. Touch Controllers, though limited in some ways, will bring the rest of your body along for the ride.

Oh, Oculus Touch Controllers how we miss you.

The problem, of course, is everything that's not the Rift, its promises or its current set of games. The price of the whole package is going to be prohibitive for what you're getting, and it will likely keep many from jumping to Rift right away.

When Touch controllers come included in the box and Rift, one day, drops a few dollars, it may transform how we play games, do work and interact with one another. Oculus has taken the Rift this far, this fast, so I don't think it's going to be much longer before that comes true, too.

We liked

The Oculus Rift is an immersive window into dozens of new worlds, and one day it will play host to hundreds, maybe thousands, of such experiences. The games that are there now are absolutely great. Some might induce a bit of nausea for first-time VR adventurers – I'm looking in your direction, ADR1FT – but some will offer an untold amount of happiness.

Seen simply as a game console, the Rift has a lot to offer. Gameplay is fun in short bursts, and the headset is comfortable to wear, even if it hugs you a little too tight sometimes. What Oculus completely understands, however, is that the Rift is more than just a gaming headset. There's already ways to watch 360-degree movies through Facebook, Vimeo and Twitch, and it's not hard to imagine a future where the Oculus Store is brimming with media content.

We disliked

Similar to that used car you've had your eye on, everything on the Oculus Rift comes with a caveat. It's immersive virtual reality … but you need to buy a costly gaming rig in order to enjoy it. It comes with a pack-in Xbox One controller, but that's only because the real gamepads – the Oculus Touch Controllers that allow you to actually use your hands in VR – are optional and expensive accessories.

Not to beat the proverbial horse here, but only a small handful of gamers will get to own the Oculus Rift – not because others don't want to, but because it's just out of their price range. Remember, that's after you buy a gaming rig that costs at least $500 to run the Rift.

Finally, while it's not necessarily a negative, the onus now is on developers to leverage the technology and push VR forward.

Oculus has created a realm of new possibilities, but what scares me is that all this technology may fall victim to novelty that will wear off in six months should developers decide that designing AAA titles in virtual reality isn't worth their time, effort and money. Without more interesting, eye-catching content, the Oculus Rift is fated for a one-way trip to the cabinet, where it will take up permanent residence next to the Wii and PlayStation Vita.

Final verdict

If it didn't have any competition, the Oculus Rift would be an easy recommendation. Virtual reality is a magical experience, and something that I think everyone who loves technology needs to try at some point.

I see huge potential for Oculus down the road – just imagine how cool it will be to see places like the Louvre or the Pyramids at Giza in real time in first-person. As it stands, though, virtual reality is a nascent medium and therefore suffers from many of the same problems others faced when they were starting out.

One day, Oculus (or one of its competitors) will be a must-own piece of technology – it could very easily be the next personal computer – but right now it feels more like a novelty than a tried-and-true necessity. The games are immersive, but not likely to hold you for hours on end. The entertainment is quirky and fun, but also ephemeral.

If you can live with that, the Oculus Rift will make for a fun experiment, one that will only improve over time. But, if you have reservations about committing the monetary resources for the headset and (what I'd consider) the requisite Touch Controllers, it's probably best to hold off on virtual reality for just a few more months until the novelty wears off.

]]>http://www.techradar.com/reviews/gaming/gaming-accessories/oculus-rift-1123963/reviewSamsung Galaxy S9 Plus reviewhttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/techradar/tech-reviews/~3/Yv-Q4wjrYBQ/samsung-galaxy-s9-plus-review
http://www.techradar.com/reviews/samsung-galaxy-s9-plus-reviewHere’s our full review of the Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus, with a big 6.2-inch display and powerful specs sheet. Are the same tweaks worth the higher price?Fri, 16 Mar 2018 21:15:31 +0000techradar.comUpdate: Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus is now available. Here's what we thought of the newest Android phone with a large screen.

The Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus just launched and it's the most advanced big phone you can buy today thanks to its oversized screen and superb cameras, even if it all looks identical to last year’sS8 Plus.

Without dramatic changes to the design, it’s only an iterative update to the S8 Plus – but it’s an iterative update to an Android phone that’s been sitting near the top of our best phones list for the past 11 months. That’s important to remember.

We’ve tested the Galaxy S9 Plus for several weeks now, and its low-light photos and big screen are the two most obvious highlights. It’s still Samsung’s grandiose 6.2-inch curved ‘Infinity’ display that will sell you on this more expensive phone over the 5.8-inchGalaxy S9, but both handsets have an improved 12MP camera that boasts a f/1.5 maximum aperture.

This is the first camera phone with such a wide aperture, giving the S9 and S9 Plus low-light and noise-defeating powers that, in many situations, are more advanced than those of even theGoogle Pixel 2, our previous best phone camera.

Lilac Purple is the hot new color on this year's Galaxy phones

The S9 Plus benefits from rear dual-lens camera, too, giving it the same telephoto capabilities as last year’s Note 8 (the S9 has one lens on the back). Its primary lens can also capture super-slow-motion video at 960 frames per second if you’re serious about video and, if you’re not, uses its 8MP front-facing camera to paint your face with AR Emoji props and masks. It's Samsung's spin on Apple's Animoji, but don't get too excited about it. It's rather unimpressive, unlike the rest of the phone.

Samsung has listened to the negative feedback regarding last year’s handsets, and has wisely moved its offset rear fingerprint sensor to a center-aligned position. It’s a more natural location, although you may not even need it thanks to the face unlock and iris scanning onboard and working at the same time. Addressing another shortcoming of the S8 Plus, Samsung finally gives its flagship phones stereo speakers for superior sound.

If you’re thinking a sudden emphasis on stereo speakers, face unlock, AR Emoji and vertically stacked 12MP dual cameras sounds as if these are Samsung’s take on iPhone X features, you're right. The S9 Plus tries to match everything Apple can do, but at a larger screen size and with a 3.5mm headphone jack – and it also bests theGoogle Pixel 2 XL’s low-light photography in some scenarios.

What’s interesting is that Apple’s and Google’s handsets aren’t the fiercest competition for the S9 Plus – it’s Samsung’s own phones. The now-cheaper Galaxy S8 Plus is an incremental downgrade, ideal for anyone put off by the high S9 Plus price, while the Galaxy Note 9 is likely six months away, perfect for early adopters who have ample cash and a penchant for the S Pen and a slightly bigger screen. That positions the S9 Plus at the top temporarily.

Right now it’s the best big Android phone in 2018, albeit an expensive one, until theGalaxy Note 9 debuts in the second half of this year.

Samsung Galaxy S9 release date and price

The official Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus release date was Friday, March 16, two weeks after pre-orders opened on February 25 (UK and Europe), and March 2 (in the US).

Its price is more expensive than last year's S8 Plus in the US and UK. In the US, it costs $839.99 for the S9 Plus unlocked through Samsung's official website. That's only $10 more expensive than the S8 Plus at launch, but it’s now $120 more expensive than the normal-sized S9. The gap is widening between the two sizes.

Of course, US carriers like Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile and Sprint will break this full price into digestible monthly fees, though Verizon and AT&T charge $100 more in the long run. But just about all American carriers offer $350 for recent phone trade-ins.

In the UK, the Galaxy S9 Plus costs £869. That's a big price hike over the S8 Plus, which cost £779 at launch. That's £90 more in one year. Ouch. In Australia it costs AU$1,349.

EE in the UK has announced that the S9 Plus is now available for pre-order. Its Essential plan starts at £150 up front and £63 per month for 4GB of data. If you upgrade to the Max plan you get 60GB of data plus two years of access to the BT Sports app for £78 per month. Additionally, buyers can get £250 off by trading in their Samsung Galaxy S7 or Galaxy S7 Edge.

Design

The Galaxy S9 Plus is the most stylish-looking smartphone you can buy thanks to Samsung continuing its design ethos of melding two glass panels with a metal frame. It doesn’t look very different from the S8 Plus, but that doesn’t matter unless you’re upgrading every year and demand annual newness.

Samsung has made small, but meaningful, changes on the back of its new phones. You’ll find the fingerprint sensor on the rear again, but now it’s aligned in the center, below the camera. The S8 Plus had a much-maligned offset scanner adjacent to the camera, and it was hard to blindly unlock your phone without smudging the camera lens. This is an improvement, although we found the fingerprint sensor pad smaller than the ones on most other Android phones.

You can choose one of four colors, including the new standout Lilac Purple. Other S9 color options at launch include Midnight Black and Coral Blue in the US, UK and Europe; there’s also a Titanium Gray hue available in other countries. Our Midnight Black review unit was a mess with fingerprints, even though we wiped it down between photos. It’s another reason to invest in a stylish Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus case.

And that’s it design-wise – you won’t readily notice anything else that’s new on the outside of the S9 Plus. The dimensions have changed by a few millimeters to reduce the top and bottom bezels, making the phone a tiny bit shorter than the S8 Plus, but it’s still a really big phone.

You’re still going to have to stretch your fingers to touch the corners of the screen furthest from your grip – navigating Google Maps on the go, for example, can be a cumbersome affair – so if you’ve been hesitant to buy into big-screen phones your best option is the smaller Galaxy S9. This is a big phone meant for big mitts.

Unlike many of its rivals, Samsung is standing by both the 3.5mm headphone jack and the microSD card slot. It’s also giving us a second year of the Bixby button on the left side of the phone to call up its digital assistant. No, you still can’t remap this button to your liking without third-party software and, yes, you’ll still hit it thinking it’s the nearby volume-down key.

Display

6.2-inch Quad HD+ Super AMOLED curved screen

90% of the front of the phone is now screen

No in-screen fingerprint sensor here

Samsung’s 6.2-inch display on the Galaxy S9 Plus is as expansive as it is impressive. It’s unchanged from the company’s previous Infinity Display – but that's held up to be a fantastic screen, so that’s okay with us, too.

The S9 Plus sports the same lovely curved screen – now with a tiny bit less bezel

Its tall 18.5:9 aspect ratio has set the standard for all-screen smartphones. It can display a Quad HD+ resolution, yet it still looks outstanding at the default Full HD 1080p. It’s the combination of the futuristic-looking curved edges, vibrant colors, and high contrast ratio that make it pop.

We also appreciate the fact that Samsung has created a screen that fills 90% of the front of the S9 Plus. There’s very little bezel here, and no notch whatsoever, which makes it feel like you’re holding one large, beautiful light beam in your hand.

That beautiful beam of light is prone to occasional false touches, which we experienced due to a combination of the curved screen and our firm grasp of such a big phone. It’s no fun watching text messages disappear only because our pinky finger glanced the backspace key (which happens to be right near the edge) while we tried to clutch this massive 6.2-inch display.

There’s no in-screen fingerprint sensor, even though we’ve seen Chinese phone makers debut the technology already. That highlight may be saved for the Note 9, or perhaps the Galaxy S10.

AR Emoji

Samsung’s answer to Apple’s Animoji is a little half-baked

Easy to save and share on any third-party application

Like it or not, Samsung’s answer to Apple’s Animoji is here on the Galaxy S9 Plus with the debut of AR Emoji. This uses the front 8MP camera to analyze a 2D image of you and then maps more than 100 different facial features to a 3D avatar.

Samsung’s take on AR masks do mirror facial expressions onto a customizable avatar, but do so rather stiffly using its single camera and software-based algorithms. AR Emoji movement can’t compare to Apple’s iPhone X TrueDepth camera array.

The good news is that it’s easy to send AR Emoji messages to friends. Samsung has chosen to record your expressions (whether a custom message or a pre-made one) in the universal GIF format. Friends/former friends who own non-Samsung handsets will be able to enjoy/loathe your constant AR tomfoolery.

AR stickers are better than AR Emoji, fool!

The feedback from friends? Our AR personas failed to look like us no matter how many times we ran through the creation process, and we found AR Emojis to be the least convincing reason to buy the Galaxy S9 Plus – the novelty quickly wears off.

You will find more variety to Samsung’s AR Emoji menu the deeper you look, though. In addition to being able to change the gender, skin color, and hairstyle of your human avatar, you can cycle through creative AR stickers, in case you want to go full-on bunny rabbit or wear a more gangster outfit complete with sunglasses, chains, hats and bandanas. This is Samsung’s take on what Snapchat can do, and it’s at least a little more creative.

Bixby

Bixby Voice is a very smart assistant that doesn’t always listen well

Bixby Vision can provide live translations with okay results

Internet connection required for features to work

The S9 Plus launches with Bixby Voice and Bixby Vision built-in, an improvement over last year’s Galaxy phones that saw Samsung’s AI feature defanged for several months.

What’s here from day one is a sometimes-convincing virtual assistant meant to rival Siri and Google Assistant. It can actually do a bit more by following through on commands – asking it to “Open Twitter and tweet ‘This is what it’s like to be the only one in the @futureplc NYC office on a snow day #SamsungGalaxyS9’” let me dictate my tweet without requiring me to open the app or type.

Apple and Google’s AI can’t follow through like this. However, both can understand me better than Bixby, and that’s a big deal. You see, Bixby kept thinking I said ‘Future peel see’ when I was dictating that tweet, and when asking it to “Send an email to Gareth Beavis with the subject: ‘How’s your Galaxy S9 review coming?’” it got everything right but ended the subject with ‘question Mark.’ Bixby is like a smart student who routinely fails to listen.

Bixby Vision breaks ground with features like live translation. You can decode a foreign language sign or menu by pointing your camera at it – all without snapping a photo and waiting for it to translate. It’s good news for travelers, though you’ll need data to power this internet-connected feature and its Google Translate backend is far from reliable. It’s helpful in a pinch, but we found asking for the English menu so much easier.

Bixby Vision's live translation works well on simpler text signs like this one, though it's not perfect.

Bixby is like a smart student who routinely fails to listen.

Bixby Vision will also continue to name and detail landmarks through location-aware smarts and attempt to identify food – and it now has the helpful (or shame-inducing) power to inform you of the amount of calories in that food. But its ability to correctly name foods is more of a joke than a reliable tool when it guesses that a lollipop is a corndog.

The 8MP front-facing camera is put to use if you’d like a makeover. Bixby Vision has a new makeup mode, overlaying various blushes, mascara, and lipsticks via partnerships with the CoverGirl and Sephora cosmetics brands. It’s an augmented reality feature designed to “guide you through the purchase flow,” notes Samsung. It seems like more of a neat tech demo for your new phone, and not a convincing use of the ‘AI’ buzzword.

Improved biometrics

Face unlock and iris scanner now work at the same time

It works okay, but the success rate trails Apple’s Face ID

New to the S9 Plus is the fact that the face unlock and iris scanner biometrics now work at the same time to unlock the phone. This is Samsung’s answer to Apple’s Face ID technology.

It works most of the time. Whenever our eyeballs and mug were looking down at the phone it opened very quickly, except when we were walking in bright sunlight – and, that’s just the sort of situation where you’ll want to recheck Google Maps or quickly reply to a message to say “I’m on my way.”

We’ve had similar issues with Face ID on the iPhone X and experience more here. Even a 95% success rate out of 100 unlock attempts in a normal day means it’ll fail five times every day, and that’s annoying. Samsung’s face unlock technology has also been spoofed in the past, so enabling it could leave you vulnerable even if it’s not exactly easy to crack.

None of these ‘futuristic’ options are as seamless as unlocking your phone through a good old-fashioned front fingerprint sensor – technology that both companies retired from their phones last year. At least Samsung includes a rear fingerprint sensor as an alternative unlock method.

Here’s something funny we picked up on while testing the S9 Plus: Samsung now lets you optionally hide notification content until the scanners recognize your eyes or face. That’s great for privacy, but as soon as it does recognize you it’ll bypass the lockscreen, and you’ll have to revert to pulling down the notification shade. Apple had a very similar issue when Touch ID Gen 2 performed too well and lockscreen notifications disappeared before anyone got to read them.

New speakers

Stereo speakers finally catch up to what Apple did on iPhone 7

40% louder than the single bottom-firing S8 Plus speaker

Still not as crisp a sound compared to iPhone X speakers

You can’t really see it, but the Galaxy S9 Plus, along with the Galaxy S9, has stereo speakers, a first for a Samsung flagship and, frankly, a long- overdue addition for the world’s smartphone leader.

Samsung finally upgrades its flagship phone to two speakers so you can hear Bill Lumbergh in stereo

Samsung-owned AKG Acoustics has finely tuned the brand new top earpiece speaker and the returning bottom-firing speaker so that they’re 40% louder than the single speaker on the S8 Plus. And support for Dolby Atmos brings simulated 360-degree sound to the new smartphone.

These two S9 Plus speakers are plenty loud, and sound almost as crisp as the iPhone X speakers in our audio tests. Apple has been outfitting its phones with stereo speakers since the iPhone 7, so we’re just pleased to see Samsung catch up.

The best part about having stereo speakers in the Galaxy S9 Plus? You won’t accidentally mute all sound from the bottom-firing speaker when holding the phone in landscape mode. That’s been a constant issue with past Samsung smartphones.

Interface and specs

New chipsets are 30% faster and S9 Plus has 6GB of RAM

Android 8.0 Oreo is here, don’t expect Android P for months

64GB or 128GB of internal storage (region dependant)

The Galaxy S9 Plus is the fastest Android phone we’ve tested thanks to the fact that it uses the Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 chipset (in the US and China to support both CDMA and GSM carriers) or Samsung’s own Exynos 9810 (globally for GSM carriers).

Both 10nm chips are the latest and greatest in smartphones right now, and they’re coupled with 6GB of RAM, compared to the 4GB in the S9. You’ll have more headroom to multitask on the 6.2-inch screen, enjoy flawless 3D gaming, and run virtualized applications on Samsung Dex.

We saw a 30% speed boost over the S8 Plus and Note 8 performance in benchmarking apps that push the chip cores to their limit. And more importantly, in real-world experience we didn’t see a hint of slowdown. That can change over time with any phone (as applications become more robust), but Samsung outfitted the S9 Plus to be future-proof.

Don’t worry about the overbearing software this year. The Galaxy S9 streamlines menus as part of a fairly bloat-free Android 8.0 Oreo software skin, now known as Samsung Experience (it’s not called TouchWhiz anymore and not nearly as big of a turn off next to stock Android). Just don’t expect the Android P update for months if not a whole year.

We like pretty much everything about Samsung’s version of Android except its default keyboard, which routinely suggests wrong or randomly capitalized words. iOS 11 has this issue, too… maybe this is another way Samsung is trying to emulate Apple in 2018.

You’re getting either 64GB (US) or 128GB (everywhere else) of internal storage in the S9 Plus, and a spot for a microSD card so you can add up to 400GB of additional space. With LG and Apple now upgrading their devices to 256GB (for a higher price), this is the one area in which Samsung has held back, especially in the US. A microSD card becomes a must if you’re looking to shoot an ample amount of 4K video.

Camera

World's first f/1.5 aperture on a phone

Dual-aperture technology works like the human eye

960fps slow-motion video capture is fun, but grainy

Samsung is ready for all of your nightmarish low-light photo scenarios with the Galaxy S9 Plus camera and its new f/1.5 aperture – a world’s first for a smartphone camera.

The S9 Plus has a dual-lens, dual aperture camera

Its magic is Dual-Aperture technology, which switches between an f/1.5 aperture (pulls in more light for darker scenes) to an f/2.4 aperture (reduces the amount of light captured to keep photos from becoming overexposed). Samsung says its mimicking how the human eye adjusts to light.

The S9 Plus is now able to soak in 28% more light with 30% less noise compared to the S8 Plus. It also has the benefit of Samsung adding DRAM to its image sensor stack, allowing photos to be made up of a composite of 12 frames instead of 3 frames. Samsung has made significant camera hardware changes, as opposed to LG’s pure software AI approach with the new LG V30S ThinkQ, and the results speak for themselves.

All of this groundbreaking camera trickery means it looks as if someone turned on more lights in your dimly lit pub and moody restaurant photos. In fact, you’re going to see the brightest photos yet from a smartphone using the Galaxy S9 Plus, and very little of the noise we’re all used to seeing when phone makers artificially amp up the brightness.

There are sacrifices at f/1.5, however. Photos can look over-processed, with smoothed or waxy skin and an overall lack of texture, at night. It’s also easier to spot glaring motion blur, even if your subjects are hardly moving. Photos are brighter than ones we shot on the iPhone X and Google Pixel 2 XL, but Samsung’s camera does like to omit texture in the name of brightness. It really comes down to a photo style preference.

Rear-facing camera samples

The cameras are different between the Galaxy S9 and Galaxy S9 Plus. Samsung’s larger phone inherits the Note 8’s dual-lens camera feature, which gives it a telephoto lens for optically zoomed-in photos without distortion. This second lens also enables bokeh-rich ‘Live Focus’ portrait photos that never seem to be flawless, but are on par with the background blurring effects the Google Pixel 2 and iPhone X are capable of.

The 8MP selfie camera is unchanged.

Front-facing cameraThe front-facing camera hasn’t changed from the Galaxy S8 Plus to the S9 Plus, using an 8MP sensor with the autofocus capability that’s so far been unique to Samsung’s phones. Pictures out of this selfie camera are bright, but too high in saturation. Samsung’s tendency to make colors punchy works for everything else, including landscape shots using the rear camera, but it can make skin tones appear slightly more red than the iPhone X’s more natural hues.

The best camera app on a phoneWhat Samsung does best is create a robust, yet simple-to-operate camera app that’s far better than anything Apple or Google have come up with (LG is a close second). Mode switching is an easy left-to-right swipe almost anywhere on the 6.2-inch viewfinder (the names of the modes appear at the top, making using of the tall screen). Toggling the front and back cameras is an intuitive swipe up or down on the screen, while triggering the selfie camera timer is an effortless open-hand gesture. Maybe the best feature is using the fastest way to launch its camera app: just double-press the physical sleep/wake button and you’re ready to snap your next shot.

4K60fps video and Super Slow Mo videoSamsung has added an option for recording 4K resolution video at 60 frames per second, with a reasonable limit of five minutes. It’s sharp, though this mode lacks optical image stabilization and doesn’t support tracking autofocus. The rest of the resolutions, from 4K 30fps on down, do have OIS and the footage looks fluid, same as last year. Samsung also gives you the option of recording normal-speed video in the new HEVC format to save space.

The biggest Galaxy S9 video highlight, however, is its Super Slow Mo video capabilities. We were able to capture slick-looking super-slow-motion video at 960fps, albeit in a noticeably lower 720p HD resolution. It’s grainy if the light isn’t ideal (and sometimes even if it is ideal, as it's slow enough to ruin office space slow motion video by picking up flickering fluorescent light). But the slow-motion effects are absolutely mesmerizing, matching what we’ve seen from the Xperia XZ1 and XZ1 Compact. The 240fps normal slow-mo video has been bumped up to 1080p Full HD, too.

Samsung told us that slow motion has been the most popular video mode outside of automatic, and here’s one more reason to continue wanting to use it: the S9 Plus has the ability to start recording slow-motion video when it detects motion. Timing the press of the on-screen shutter button is always a pain when recording slow-motion video, and this helps alleviate that problem. It’s not perfect if the motion isn’t obvious enough when passing in front of the on-screen motion-detection box, but it’s brilliant when it all works out.

Battery life

3,500mAh battery

Same all-day battery life as the Galaxy S8 Plus

Fast Charging was speedier in our tests

We’ve tested the Samsung Galaxy S9 battery, and it’s a lot like the rest of the phone: it matches what we saw from the Galaxy S8 Plus a year ago. That translates into all-day battery life.

Pro tip: keep the default Full HD display on instead of switching to the Quad HD+ (2K) resolution. You won't notice the difference except in Gear VR and it saves a tremendous amount of battery life.

It has a 3,500mAh-capacity battery – the same as last year’s phone – and it’s still bigger than the 3,000mAh- and 3,300mAh-equipped Galaxy S9 and Note 8. It’s the biggest battery you can get in a newer Samsung flagship. We were hoping to eke out a few more hours courtesy of the new more efficient chipsets that power the S9 and S9 Plus, but that hasn’t happened.

Samsung, once again, isn’t pushing the boundaries of its battery capacity, perhaps understandably given its missteps with the explosion-prone Galaxy Note 7. However, it has slightly improved charging times, according to our tests.

In our lab test, running a looped HD video for 90 minutes, the battery sank from 100% to 87%, the exact 13% decrease we saw from last year's Plus-sized Samsung phone. However, it has slightly improved charging times, according to our tests.

Fast Charging the S9 Plus with the included charger for just 15 minutes brings it from 0% to 19%, and 30 minutes gets it to 38%; at 45 minutes, the phone gets up to a comfortable 58%. In the end, it takes one hour and 41 minutes to reach 100%, the same as the Galaxy S8 Plus. But from a dead battery, it charges faster at those crucial lower levels.

Samsung also supports fast wireless charging, and sells a bunch of wireless charging pads. Its Qi wireless charging method still isn’t as quick as wired charging speeds, but it’s faster than you can wireless-charge an iPhone X.

Final verdict

The Galaxy S9 is the best of what Samsung has to offer at a really big size. Its 6.2-inch curved screen is spacious and elegant-looking, even if it appears as if nothing has changed about it.

The S9 Plus features that have been tweaked are important. The fingerprint sensor is now in an ideal, center-aligned spot on the back, the speakers finally give us overdue stereo sound on a Samsung flagship and, most importantly, the low-light-focused camera snaps bright photos in the dark instead of saddling us with a bunch of dimly lit throwaways. We also got a kick out of the super-slow-motion camera. It’s a best camera phone contender, for sure.

The Galaxy S9 Plus also checks all the other boxes for an iterative upgrade: its new chips provide faster performance, it has more RAM, and its virtual assistant is smarter, although still flawed. Color us with a non-surprised face in AR Emoji.

Tom Hanks in 'Big.' Appropriate for a 6.2-inch display.

We actually didn’t care for AR Emoji in any way, shape or face-transform. Let’s all pretend it doesn’t exist. It’s a fun demo to show friends at best, and Samsung’s unsuccessful attempt to match Apple’s trending (but also fairly meaningless) technology at worst.

There are three big obstacles to owning the Galaxy S9 Plus. First, it’s a big phone meant for big hands. If you’re not into that, go with the normal-sized S9 for its one-hand-friendly operation, even if you like the extra screen space, RAM, and battery life. Second, it’s more costly than the S9. It’s a lot to pay for 0.4 inches of extra screen space and more power. Third, the Galaxy Note 9 is expected in August, and the Note phones are historically slightly bigger and noticeably better than Samsung’s S-level flagships, and include a handy S Pen.

Of course, if you want a really big phone right now, you’re not going to find one better than the S9 Plus. It’s our favorite phone for people with big hands and big wallets.

First reviewed: March 2018

Not convinced this phone is for you? Check out these instead:

Competition

iPhone X

Apple’s latest phone is its most tempting bait in years for anyone who has been thinking about switching from Android to iOS 11. The company has finally given its smartphone a big redesign with an all-screen display, powerful front-facing camera and sensor array, and wireless charging.

Some of these features are old news for Samsung owners, and the Galaxy S9 and S9 Plus still eke out a design win with their curved displays and two sizes to choose from. And while Apple has iMessages and a far more cohesive app ecosystem, Samsung has the better price, and a superior camera in low light.

Samsung Galaxy S9

Can you handle a smartphone with a 6.2-inch screen and a bump in price? The Galaxy S9 Plus is clearly has the edge over the S9 thanks to its bigger screen, dual-lens camera, more RAM and additional battery life. You also get 128GB of internal storage instead of 64GB everywhere but the US.

That said, if you hate big phones you should immediately turn your attention to the S9 with its more reasonable 5.8-inch display. No amount of extra power will make you love the Plus version if you despise having to use two hands to operate a smartphone.

Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus

You won’t be able to tell the difference between the Galaxy S8 Plus and Galaxy S9 Plus from the front. They look identical. So if you’re hunting for a better price, you should still consider the S8 Plus. It won’t get you the best low-light photos, dual-lens camera, stereo speakers or extra chip and RAM performance, but it’s an iterative downgrade for considerable savings.

Google Pixel 2 XL

This is the match-up you’ve been waiting for given that both Android smartphones have powerful cameras. The Samsung captures better low-light photos, but the Pixel keeps more textures intact, even if the subjects aren’t quite as bright. And while the Pixel 2 XL has a modern 18:9 aspect ratio, a sizable 6-inch display and some powerful specs, it’s not nearly as stylish-looking or as fast as the curved 6.2-inch display found on the S9 Plus.

]]>http://www.techradar.com/reviews/samsung-galaxy-s9-plus-reviewFujifilm X-H1http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/techradar/tech-reviews/~3/8vlrqHxA-NY/fujifilm-x-h1
http://www.techradar.com/reviews/fujifilm-x-h1The X-H1 is Fujifilm's new flagship X Series camera, but does it do enough to differentiate it from the X-T2? We find out...Fri, 16 Mar 2018 18:08:30 +0000techradar.comThe Fujifilm X-H1 is the new flagship X Series mirrorless camera, sitting above both the X-T2 and X-Pro2 in the range. As you'd expect for a camera aimed at serious enthusiast photographers, pros and videographers alike, the X-H1 features a comprehensive specification, including in-body image stabilization – a first for a Fujifilm camera,.

That said, it shares a lot of tech with its siblings, so the question is whether the X-H1 offers enough new features to differentiate it from the rest of the Fujifilm X Series range. Let's take a closer look...

Features

In-body image stabilization is a first for an X Series camera

Cinema 4K at 24p

Same 24.3MP APS-C X-Trans III CMOS sensor as X-T2

For the X-H1 Fujifilm has opted to stick with its 24.3MP APS-C X-Trans III CMOS sensor, which we first saw back in 2016 in the X-Pro2, and which has since found its way into the likes of the X-T2, X-T20 and X100F. It's a sensor that's certainly impressed us in the past, but the relatively modest ISO range of 200-12,800 (expandable to 100-51,200) looks a little conservative compared to some potential rivals; the Nikon D500, for instance, has an extended sensitivity range that hits an ISO equivalent of 1,640,000.

If Fujifilm's engineers may have taken it easy in the sensor department, they've been busy elsewhere on the X-H1, and the big news is the arrival of in-body image stabilization (IBIS for short). While we've seen sensor-shift anti-shake technology on mirrorless cameras from Sony, Panasonic and Olympus, Fujifilm users have had to make do with the limited lineup of optical stabilized Fujinon lenses.

This all changes with the X-H1, with the new in-camera 5-axis system offering up to 5.5 stops of compensation with any lens not equipped with Fujifilm's OIS technology, which is great news if you've got a bag full of Fujifilm's lovely fast prime lenses. And you're not missing out if you want to pair an OIS lens with the X-H1 either, as the camera's IBIS will work in tandem with the OIS to provide a 3-axis system.

That's not all, as Fujifilm has also equipped the shutter with suspension for absorbing the shocks that can be generated when using the mechanical shutter, which should help reduce the risk of any additional camera shake.

While Fujifilm doesn't want the X-H1 to be seen as quite the hybrid video camera the Panasonic Lumix GH5 is considered to be, it has improved the camera's video recording capabilities over the X-T2. As well as offering 4K recording (3840 x 2160) at 30p, the X-H1 also offers DCI 4K (4096 x 2160) at up to 24p, while it also has the edge over the X-T2 when capturing Full HD footage, being capable of shooting at up to 120p compared to the X-T2's 60p.

Fujifilm has also doubled the bit rate on the X-H1 over the X-T2, increasing it from 100Mbps to 200Mbps, while it also offers a 400% dynamic range setting (approximately 12 stops) and an F-log shooting mode. There's also a new ETERNA film simulation setting which Fujifilm reckons is ideal for shooting movies; this simulates the look of cinematic film, creating understated colors and rich shadow tones.

The rear display can also be pulled outwards and away from the body when the camera is tilted on its side

The X-H1 gets a bigger electronic viewfinder than the X-T2, with the 2.36 million-dot OLED display in the X-T2 replaced by a 3.69 million-dot OLED unit, although the magnification is down a touch, from 0.77x to 0.75x.

As we first saw on the X-T2, the X-H1 has a 3.0-inch rear display with a double-jointed articulated movement which means the screen can also be pulled outwards and away from the body when the camera is tilted on its side. One noticeable change from the X-T2 is the arrival of touchscreen functionality.

In terms of connectivity, the X-H1 gets Bluetooth on top of Wi-Fi and NFC, and once you've paired the camera with your smartphone or tablet and downloaded the accompanying Fujifilm Camera Remote app you'll be able to easily transfer your images and share them on social media

Build and handling

Dedicated AF-On button

Much more pronounced grip than X-T2

1.28-inch LCD on top plate

As you'd expect for a camera aimed at serious enthusiasts and pros, the X-H1 is both dust-proof and water-resistant, while it's also designed to operate in temperatures as low as -10C. It's similar to the X-T2 in these respects, but to underline the X-H1's pro credentials the magnesium alloy used for the shell is 25% thicker than that used in the X-T2, and it sports a high-quality scratch-resistant coating.

The design of the X-H1 is a fusion of the X-T2 and the medium-format GFX 50S, with the most notable feature taken from the latter camera being the pronounced handgrip. This gives a much more satisfactory grip than the X-T2, especially if you're going to be shooting over long periods.

Another feature borrowed from the GFX 50S is the 1.28-inch LCD on the top of the camera. This displays all key shooting information, but it does come at the expense of the dedicated exposure compensation dial on the X-T2; instead there's a little exposure comp button next to the shutter release, and, just as we found when shooting with the GFX 50S, it's a tad awkward to use this in conjunction with the rear command dial.

Current X Series users, though, should feel right at home with the controls of the X-H1, with dedicated dials for ISO and shutter speed (both featuring locking buttons to prevent accidental movement), along with switches for drive modes and metering.

As we've come to expect with an X Series camera, the X-H1 is highly customizable, with the segments of the four-way control pad on the rear, as well as the dedicated function buttons, all capable of being assigned different functions via the menu.

As we've seen on recent X Series cameras, the X-H1 benefits from a small focus lever, while there's now a dedicated AF-On button on the rear of the camera for back-button focusing, a technique many photographers swear by – although if we're being hypercritical its positioning could do with shifting about 5mm to the right so the thumb falls more naturally on it.

Thanks to the re-designed shutter mechanism with improved damping, anyone who's shot with the X-T2 (or other X Series cameras) will instantly notice how much quieter the shutter is when triggered. The new feather-touch shutter button can take a little getting used to, as it's incredibly sensitive, but once you've got to grips with the hair trigger on the X-H1 you'll find it a welcome addition.

Autofocus

Tweaked version of the AF system used in the X-T2

91-point phase-detect AF system

5 AF-C custom settings to help focus tracking

The Fujifilm X-H1 uses the same hybrid autofocus system (featuring both phase- and contrast-detection AF) as the X-T2, but Fujifilm has tinkered with the AF algorithm to enhance the performance further, while it's also improved the sensitivity of the phase-detection AF; it's now sensitive down to light levels as low as -1EV, compared to -0.5EV on the X-T2, and this is complemented by the -3EV sensitivity of the contrast-detection system.

Furthermore, if you use or are planning to use teleconverters with moderately slow lenses, such as the XF100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 R LM OIS WR, the good news is that the minimum aperture has been expanded from f/8 to f/11 on the X-H1, allowing phase-detection autofocus to be used at slow apertures.

The autofocus system in the X-H1, then, offers 91 phase-detect AF points arranged to provide decent coverage across the frame

The autofocus system in the X-H1, then, offers 91 phase-detect AF points arranged to provide decent coverage across the frame, while it's possible to have a total of 325 AF points at your disposal thanks to the contrast-detect AF points coming into play. However, it's only possible to access all 325 points in Single focus mode – switch to Continuous (AF-C), and while the contrast-detect points support AF acquisition, they aren't selectable.

As on the X-T2 there are five AF-C presets to choose from depending on how your subject is moving in the frame, how fast it's moving, and where in the frame you want the camera to place bias for focusing. These three parameters are called Tracking Sensitivity (how long the camera waits before switching focus), Speed Tracking Sensitivity (determines how sensitive the tracking system is to changes in subject speed) and Zone Area Switching (whether bias is to the centre, auto or front), and as well as the five presets there's also a custom setting allowing you to refine the three variables yourself.

For static subjects, the autofocus is very quick and precise. Fujifilm X-H1 with 16-55mm f/2.8, 1/1100 sec at f/2.8, ISO200

The AF system performs very well for static subjects, with focusing both quiet and quick (we tested the X-H1 with Fujifilm's 16-55mm f/2.8 standard zoom). Switch to continuous AF and the tracking system is still very competent – we found that it could happily track fairly predictable subjects, although it will struggle when movement becomes a bit more tricky to judge.

There's still room for improvement – the X-H1's AF system doesn't quite have the sophistication of the 693-point AF system in the (albeit slightly pricer) Sony Alpha A7 III, or the excellent 153-point AF system in the Nikon D500.

Performance

Same burst shooting speed as the X-T2

Viewfinder is bright and crisp

Solid metering performance

As Fujifilm's flagship camera you'd expect the X-H1 to offer some performance advantages over cameras further down the range, but perhaps a little disappointingly the X-H1 shares the same burst shooting speeds as the X-T2.

With the mechanical shutter selected both cameras are capable of shooting at 8fps, and, with a SDHC UHS-II card installed, can capture 31 compressed raw files at this rate. Compare that to the Nikon D500, which is capable of shooting 200 compressed raw files at 10fps (admittedly with an XQD card), and the X-H1 looks a little pedestrian.

The X-H1 can shoot at a faster rate of 14fps if you opt to use the electronic shutter (for 27 raw files), while should you add the optional VPB-XH1 battery grip to the mix the burst rate increases to a fast 11fps with the mechanical shutter.

The viewfinder is excellent. Raise the camera to your eye and the display is large and bright

The viewfinder is excellent. Raise the camera to your eye and the display is large and bright, while the clarity and color rendition don't disappoint; in low-light conditions things get a little noisy, as the screen is artificially lightened, but you can still easily frame your subject, albeit at the expense of the increased grain. We'd suggest though that you opt for the optional 'Boost' mode under Power Management in the menu of the X-H1, as this sees the refresh rate increase to 100fps – it's worth the sacrifice of the extra power used by the battery.

Fujifilm has stuck with its TTL 256-zone metering system for the X-H1 – it's a system that's been used in the majority of X Series cameras, and it's a consistent performer. In high-contrast scenes it does tend to underexpose the shot to preserve highlight detail, though, and there will be occasions when you have to dial in a touch of exposure compensation to rectify this.

The X-H1 uses Fujifilm's NP-W126S Li-ion battery – that's the same battery as the X-T2, which is good news if you're planning to have both cameras in your kit bag, but the X-T2 has the slightly better battery life of 340 shots, compared to 310 shots for the X-H1.

This can be attributed to a number things, including the fact that the larger viewfinder and in-body stabilization are likely to drain the power of the X-H1 a little more. We'd recommend getting the VPB-XH1 battery grip, as you can pack in an extra two batteries (in addition to the one in the body), while handling is also improved for portrait-format shooting.

Image quality

Uses one of the best APS-C sensors out there

Very good dynamic range

Film Simulation modes are excellent

With the Fujifilm X-H1 using the same 24.3MP X-Trans III CMOS sensor as other X Series cameras, image quality doesn't disappoint. As we've found in the past, this is one of the best APS-C sensors out there: it does an excellent job of resolving detail, while the colors recorded are hard to fault.

While it's a little disappointing to see the fairly conservative ISO range compared to some rivals, the X-H1 makes up for this with how well it handles noise. Images shot at the lower end of the sensitivity range display are exceptionally clean – you'll have to look really closely for signs of luminance (grain-like) noise in flat, blocked-color areas.

It's only when you hit ISO3200 that luminance noise starts to become a bit of an issue, while at ISO6400 and ISO12,800 you'll start to see colors become a little less saturated, and chroma (color) noise becomes more pronounced.

While many manufacturers furnish their cameras with their own JPEG picture styles, Fujifilm’s Film Simulation modes easily have to be the most successful, and the X-H1 features with 16 of them, including the new ETERNA mode that's intended for video shooters. These modes can produce some lovely results – we particularly enjoyed Arcos for mono images – and in some instances you may be more than happy with the processed JPEGs straight from the camera, rather than tinkering with a raw file.

Dynamic range doesn't disappoint, and you have plenty of flexibility to recover detail in raw files during post-processing. We found it possible to pull back a good amount of highlight and shadow detail once the files had been opened in Lightroom.

Verdict

There's no question that the X-H1 is Fujifilm's most advanced X Series camera to date, thanks to a range of new and refined features. These include the arrival of IBIS, a brilliant high-resolution EVF, advanced 4K video capture, touchscreen control, and an all-round tougher build.

It's perhaps that last point, however, which prevents X-H1 from capturing our imagination in quite the same way as many previous X Series cameras, particularly the X-T2. The X-H1's considerably bulkier build will certainly appeal to some, while it should help it to balance better with larger and longer lenses, but its size means it loses some of that X Series DNA that's made cameras like the X-T2 a firm favorite.

Also, with this camera aimed at serious enthusiasts and professionals it would have been nice to see Fujifilm make more of an effort to put clear blue water between the X-H1 and the X-T2 in terms of performance. As it is, apart from some tweaks to the AF you're not gaining much, if anything with the X-H1.

And then there's the price: at £1,699 / $1,899 / AU$3,399 (you'll only be able to get the X-H1 with the VPB-XH1 grip in Australia), Fujifilm is pitting the X-H1 against some very tough competition, including the likes of the Nikon D500 and full-frame Sony Alpha A7 III.

In short, then, the X-H1 is sure to appeal to X Series shooters who've been crying out for in-body image stabilization, but it doesn't have quite the same broad appeal as the X-T2. The Fujifilm X-H1 is a very good camera, but not quite a great one.

Competition

]]>http://www.techradar.com/reviews/fujifilm-x-h1Yi Technology 360 VRhttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/techradar/tech-reviews/~3/7ydnh-KJzEI/yi-technology-360-vr
http://www.techradar.com/reviews/yi-technology-360-vr5.7K resolution, livestreaming and endless manual tweaks make this a solid 360-degree shooter.Fri, 16 Mar 2018 16:04:12 +0000techradar.comIn the world of 360-degree cameras, 4K is just not enough. It might sound good in relation to the current crop of TVs, but since 360-degree videos are stretched as far as the eye can see, more pixels mean much better images, which is why this cigarette packet–sized camera comes with 5.7K resolution at 30 frames per second.

It also shoots 16MP stills, has a host of manual controls, and streams in 4K to YouTube. So can the Yi 360 VR camera, which costs around $400 / £350 / AU$500, match the talents of the GoPro Fusion, Insta 360 One and Samsung Gear 360?

Features

Exposure control

Shoots in resolutions including 5K and 4K at 30fps

Dual 220-degree f/2.0 lenses

Let's not pretend that a 5.7K resolution is going to produce pin-sharp 360-degree images. It's not, but the Yi 360 VR is the only 360-degree camera that offers such a high resolution – even the pricier GoPro Fusion tops out at 5.2K. This fixed-focus camera's Sony IMX377 image sensors capture 5760 x 2880 pixels, about 16 megapixels, for both video and stills.

One of the main issues with popularizing 360-degree cameras as a genre is that it's impossible for the photographer to get out of shot – it's one reason why the market has been skewed towards novelty selfie 360-degree cameras rather than anything more serious. The Yi 360 VR gets over that by taking three separate still images, five seconds apart, of you standing in three clearly separate positions. The software then identifies you in all three pictures, and removes you from the finished composite image. In our experiments it worked really well.

Other features that will appeal to semi-pro videographers include the ability to adjust the exposure metering mode, exposure compensation, white balance and ISO (up to ISO800 for photos, and ISO6400 for video), and compatibility with external microphones (via a Yi-made adapter in the USB-C slot). That latter feature is mostly for those who want to livestream in 4K to YouTube and Facebook (though the latter doesn't yet support 4K yet), which the Yi 360 VR can do for about an hour.

Of more use to most creatives will be the option to capture 360-degree footage in bursts or as timelapses, from images taken at an interval of between half a second and 60 seconds, while the Yi 360 VR also shoots in resolutions including 5K and 4K at 30fps for NTSC and 25fps for PAL, 2.5K at 50/60fps, and 2K at 100/120fps.

However, the Yi 360 VR does lack some key semi-pro features – a 24fps option (found on the GoPro Fusion), and over-capture software for post-editing 360 footage to widescreen 16:9 (found on the GoPro Fusion and the Insta360 One).

Design

More substantial than some 360-degree cameras

Not waterproof like the GoPro Fusion

Universal tripod thread (1/4-inch)

The Yi 360 VR's form factor is best described as functional. Measuring 102 x 53 x 30mm and weighing 187g with the battery installed, it's more substantial than some 360 cameras, but it slips easily enough into a pocket. Those worried about scratching its dual 220-degree dual f/2.0 lenses will want to use the soft-lined drawstring bag supplied in the box. Sadly, this camera isn't waterproof like the GoPro Fusion.

What separates the Yi 360 VR from a lot of novelty/selfie 360 shooters is its serious-looking design. For instance, on the top of the device is a small OLED screen, which allows for reasonably easy toggling through the menus using two navigation buttons and the on/off switch on the side of the camera.

On the other side is a USB-C port for recharging, a micro HDMI output, a microSD card slot, and a removable 1400mAh lithium-ion battery. That's quite some haul for a 360 camera. However, videographers will especially love what is perhaps the camera's most simple feature of all: a universal tripod thread (1/4-inch) on the camera's undercarriage.

This instantly brings into play selfie sticks and tripods, and a tripod is included in the box. It's super-solid and stable, and easy to pocket, but its low-slung spider design means the camera is positioned very close to the floor; that might be a good thing in some filming scenarios, but it was a tad too close to the ground for our liking.

Performance

Both photos and videos have well saturated colors

In-camera stitching not very effective

Battery life is fairly short

When it comes to shooting 360 video it's best to use a 64GB, Class U3 or higher microSD card, because at the camera's maximum resolution – 5.7K video at 120Mbps – there's a lot of data to deal with. However, lesser SD cards will be fine if you lower the resolution.

Image quality is impressive. Both photos and videos have well saturated colors throughout the frame, while noise and chromatic aberration are noticeably less than you'll get from cheaper 360-degree cameras.

Although the Yi 360 VR can perform in-camera stitching using a template (the stitching distance can be set to selfie, indoor or outdoor), it's not very effective; the stitching line is rather obvious, which can be particularly problematic if people's faces are positioned on it.

If you do rely on in-camera stitching, the resolution is downscaled to Full HD. PC users can get around this by downloading the free Yi 360° Studio software from Yi's website to stitch optically in 5.7K, but there's no similar software for Mac OS (Yi recommends that Mac owners make use of the Yi 360 VR template on the expensive Mistika VR third-party VR video-editing software).

Battery life is fairly short; the Yi 360 VR lasted for about 50 minutes in our cold weather test, although that should be enough for a day out if you're shooting stills and the occasional short video, which is how cameras like this are designed to be used.

App

Free Yi 360° app for iOS and Android

Offers plenty of control

Provides quick adjustments

The Yi 360 VR sends out a 2.4GHz or 5GHz Wi-Fi signal for connecting to a smartphone via the free Yi 360 VR app for iOS and Android. The app is very impressive, enabling you to control all of the settings on the camera as well as presenting a live feed and offering stacks of editing and sharing options. It also acts as a conduit for livestreaming to social media.

When you download a video from the camera it's best to downscale it to Full HD, although if you're prepared to wait a while you can get a stitched 4K/30fps video. You can also inspect photos in various views, from stretched and 'little planet' to round and dual VR mode for viewing in Google Cardboard or similar VR glasses. To stretch the battery as far as possible it's best to resist the temptation to transfer files between the camera and a phone via the Yi 360 VR's Wi-Fi; the unit heats up dramatically, which noticeably zaps the battery life.

Verdict

If you're a semi-pro videographer wanting to experiment with 360-degree video, the Yi 360 VR gives you most of the tools you need. A serious-looking product that's more about core quality than novelty features, its standard tripod thread lends versatility, while its 5.7K resolution, consistent color and endless manual tweaks are all plus points.

Auto stitching is basic, and Mac users might be irritated by the lack of desktop editing software (which makes saving videos in full resolution tricky), while those looking for waterproofing, over-capture and a 24fps mode – albeit at a slightly lower maximum resolution – should consider the GoPro Fusion. But there's no doubt that the Yi 360 VR is a highly ambitious, great value 360 camera that semi-pro videographers will love.

]]>http://www.techradar.com/reviews/yi-technology-360-vrDyson Pure Cool Linkhttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/techradar/tech-reviews/~3/VkQO7N6uWm0/dyson-pure-cool-link
http://www.techradar.com/reviews/dyson-pure-cool-linkWhen money is no bar, the Dyson Pure Cool Link is the air purifier you should buy. It's premium, sleek and powerful.Fri, 16 Mar 2018 13:46:54 +0000techradar.comDyson's entry into the air purifier market will be unnerving for existing manufacturers. The company is renowned globally, giving it the chance to charge a premium for its brand value.

That said, expensive also means exclusive in India. So, people who buy Dyson's products will want nothing less than perfection. That's just how India is, making Dyson's task easy and difficult at the same time.

Price and Release Date

The Dyson Pure Cool Link Tower will cost you a cool Rs 39,900 and it was launched in India on 15 February this year. The company is also selling a smaller "Desk" version of this device here, priced at Rs 34,900.

The company also sells hair dryers and handheld vacuum cleaners in the country, which will all be sold in online and offline outlets.

For pairing, you just need to place the remote atop the air purifier.

Setting up the Dyson Pure Cool Link

Of all the air purifiers I've reviewed, the Cool Link has been the easiest to set up. It's delivered in a tall box, in two halves. The bottom part sucks dirty air in, while the top part blows clean air out. To be clear, this is a "fanless" air purifier, meaning you won't actually see any blades. You can put your hand through the top part without injuring yourself.

To set it up, you simply clip on the top and bottom together. Once clipped, the purifier is ready to use. The entire contraption is about a metre high and will fit in any corner of your room. It has a 2.5-metre cord that is supplied with the purifier, which should be enough for most homes.

The last step in setting the purifier up is the remote, which pairs as soon as you place it on top of the purifier. The remote operates on infra-red, so you will need to point it at the small display on the purifier when required. You can use the remote to increase intensity, change modes, set times, toggle oscillation and night mode, and turn the purifier on or off.

Dyson told me they would send an engineer to set up the device, but really, the whole process was too easy for me to wait an extra day. You need no technical knowledge or know how to do it.

The Dyson Pure Cool Link is meant to be placed in a corner of the room.

Using the Dyson Pure Cool Link Tower

A Dyson engineer told me that the company recommends the Tower for most homes. However, it is actually too powerful for most regular rooms. In a 20x20 room, the purifier cleans the air in less than 20 minutes. That is, in test conditions, when I was intentionally burning matches etc. to increase PM2.5 levels in the room. Since bringing the Cool Link into the room, there's been noticeably lesser dust on my furniture too.

The Cool Link should be kept in a corner of the room. From there, it can oscillate to blow air out in all directions. It has two sensors that analyse, PM2.5, PM10 and VOCs (Volatile Organic Compounds). VOCs can be produced by paint varnishes, air fresheners, smoking and more. Essentially, the Cool Link will take care of dust, invisible pollutants and odours, just like most other purifiers.

The sensors on Cool Link measure the air quality in your room, send it to the company's cloud servers and turn up the fan intensity. In practice, there's a sensor lag of about 15 minutes, in which all of this calculations are done. You won't feel this happen unless you're actually blowing smoke or other pollutants in your room. On regular use, the purifier will kick into high gear intermittently.

The air intensity can be toggled between one to 10 and the company says four is the economy speed. That's the speed the Cool Link will choose whenever you set it to Auto, and it will kick into high gear in the next 15 minutes if required.

The purifier uses a 360-degree glass HEPA filter that can be changed manually when required. It's lab tested for 12 months usage but could last you anywhere between eight to 12 months depending on your usage. After running for about 8 hours a day for a week and a half, my unit says the filters will last for another 4159 hours (about 6 months).

Dyson Link app

The Dyson Link app is new in India and it's the most confusing bit about this device. That's not to say it's not useful or easy to use, it's just set to higher standards than those prevalent in India. In the week and a half that I've used it, the app has never shown me acceptable AQI levels, settling to average at best.

Dyson says this is because the app matches data with international standards. As a result, it never recognises AQI in India to be acceptable. The app shows you both indoor and outdoor air quality, of which the latter it gets from the Central Pollution Control Board.

As a result, you will almost never see the purifier's intensity drop below seven for regular use. In the long run, that could mean the purifier will require a filter change faster in India than it does in UK etc. Based on my current usage, the filter is set to run out in the next six months, a couple of months shy of Dyson's claims.

The app also has a remote, that allows you to use the Cool Link from anywhere in the world. You can set schedules to turn the air purifier on at set times during the day. You can also turn the product on/off remotely whenever required.

The schedules didn't work at first, but that was probably a minor bug. I reset the time zones on the app once and the schedules started working.

The bottom part of the air purifier holds the 360 degree HEPA filter.

Design and Build

Standing at just over a metre, the Dyson Pure Cool Link is perhaps the sleekest purifier you can buy in India right now. It's available in white and blue colours and they both look quite sleek. If you care about the aesthetics of your room and can afford this device, it's the one you should go for.

The base diameter is just under 200mm, meaning it doesn't take up a lot of space either. Similarly, it weighs just under 4kg when fully set up, meaning you can move it around quite easily as well.

Our Verdict

The Dyson Pure Cool Link is without a doubt the best air purifier you can buy in India today. That is if a premium air purifier is what you want. If you can afford it, the Cool Link is the purifier you should buy.

]]>http://www.techradar.com/reviews/dyson-pure-cool-linkLG V30S ThinQhttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/techradar/tech-reviews/~3/u6AofDiIPaA/lg-v30s-thinkq
http://www.techradar.com/reviews/lg-v30s-thinkqSameness is the only way to describe the LG V30S ThinQ, which doesn't do much besides add RAM and a blue color.Fri, 16 Mar 2018 13:31:00 +0000techradar.comThe LG V30S ThinQ is LG's very obvious pivot to launch a smartphone at MWC 2018 without actually creating an entirely new phone.

It's a basic specs update to the existing LG V30, with a few tweaks that make it better than the Android phone we reviewed six months ago – and emphasis on few tweaks.

None of the changes are going to send you upgrading. Instead, it's the true definition of an iterative smartphone update. Here's what we've experienced so far from this Android 8.0 Oreo handset while at MWC 2018.

New LG V30S ThinQ design and specs

We're looking at 6GB of RAM where there was 4GB of RAM before, 128GB and 256GB internal storage configurations instead of 64GB and and 128GB, and a brand new color, New Moroccan Blue, which joins Platinum Gray.

The design and specs are otherwise the same as before, and that's okay for most people. It runs the same Snapdragon 835 chipset that's found in most Android phones today and we're a fan of its 6-inch P-OLED screen in a compact body. This is the thinnest and lightest phone with a 6-inch screen (or bigger). The understated design really lets this big 18:9 screen shine.

We're still testing the phone and its 6GB of RAM to determine its meaningfulness, but we already find the internal storage configurations beneficial. While Samsung is capping its space at 64GB with microSD storage, LG V30 ThinQ starts everyone off at 128GB now and also includes a microSD storage slot. To us, that's the right move.

About that AI camera

The LG V30S ThinQ touts new camera smarts through its AI CAM mode, which is a trendy way of saying it automatically switches between eight scenes: portrait, food, pet, landscape, city, flower, sunrise, and sunset.

Automatic scene switching is helpful rather than having to manually cycle between the modes, but other smartphones do this with a dedicated AI chip. This seems more like a software, not hardware update that's not coming to the LV30, sadly.

There are a few other camera software tweaks here. The phone links to up services like Amazon and Pinterest to identify objects around you, while Bright mode reduces photo noise with algorithms in addition to measuring ambient light.

Bright mode could be why you're going to want to opt for LG V30S over the original (and likely cheaper LG V30). If it can truly harness the power of algorithms to make low-light photography better, that's good news people searching for a reason to own LG's latest and greatest. We'll do more side-by-side photo testing soon.

There's very little that's convincing outside of the camera we got six months ago on the original V30. The back of the phone has a dual-lens 16MP camera that shoots at f/1.6 on the normal lens, and f/1.9 on the wide angle lens. The front-facing camera is capable of taking wide f/1.9 selfies.

We're a big fan of the video modes and settings found on the LG V30, and that hasn't changed in the upgrade to the V30S ThinQ. Our favorite LG-exclusive feature is Point Focus, which lets you gradually zoom into specific spots while a video is recording, not just blow up the center of the viewfinder screen. The Cine Video menu returns for the same comprehensive color grading options.

Early verdict

All of this makes the LG V30S ThinQ a minor upgrade to what we've considered an underrated Android phone. It has features you may have overlooked: an impressive 18:9 6-inch P-OLED display, powerful DAC audio system and feature-packed video recording modes.

Should you buy the LG V30S ThinQ over the original or wait for this one? That's going to depend on the LG V30S price and release date, which the company has yet to announce. It could land in Korea and the US in the next month, but both the price and official release date are up to carriers.

By the time it does launch, you may be tempted by the Samsung Galaxy S9 and the Galaxy S9 Plus, which are poised to be the more powerful, capable and camera-focused Android phones of 2018. Everything comes down to what LG charges and how much you want to spend.

MWC (Mobile World Congress) is the world's largest exhibition for the mobile industry, stuffed full of the newest phones, tablets, wearables and more. TechRadar is reporting live from Barcelona all week to bring you the very latest from the show floor. Head to our dedicatedMWC 2018 hubto see all the new releases, along with TechRadar's world-class analysis and buying advice about your next phone.

]]>http://www.techradar.com/reviews/lg-v30s-thinkqiPhone SEhttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/techradar/tech-reviews/~3/L0_8t423unA/review
http://www.techradar.com/reviews/phones/mobile-phones/iphone-se-1317464/reviewHow is Apple the first to work out the public's appetite for a powerful phone in a much smaller form factor?Fri, 16 Mar 2018 13:02:00 +0000techradar.comThe iPhone SE is still going. Holding out against its big-screen siblings, this 4-inch handset continues to offer a compact, one-handed use guarantee no other current iPhone can muster.

Update: We're still waiting for the long-rumored launch of the iPhone SE 2, but the longer we wait the more unlikely it seems that it'll ever arrive. For now, your only option for a compact iPhone is the original SE.

It is getting long in the tooth though, having launched over two years ago, which means when compared to the likes of the iPhone 8, 8 Plus and iPhone X it's significantly under-powered and feature-sparse.

Yet, it's still a more than viable option for those looking for a low-cost iPhone, or a compact Apple handset. It's been updated to iOS 11 - the latest software from Apple - and unlike the X, it has a Touch ID fingerprint scanner.

iPhone SE price and availability

iPhone SE release date: March 2016

32GB iPhone SE price: $349 (£349, AU$549)

128GB iPhone SE price: $449 (£449, AU$699)

At launch the iPhone SE price was $399 (£379, AU$679) for the 16GB model and $449 (£429, $AU749) if you choose the larger 64GB option - although things have changed since March 2016.

The iPhone SE is no longer available in 16GB and 64GB variants, with Apple instead offering the handset in more appealing 32GB and 128GB capacities.

While the storage sizes have increased, the price has dropped slightly for the 32GB iPhone SE with a price of $349 (£349, AU$549), while the 128GB model will set you back $449 (£449, AU$699).

Its still widely available both on Apple's own site, and via major retailers and carriers around the world, so you shouldn't have too much trouble picking one up.

Besides price (the iPhone SE is the cheapest Apple handset on the market, after all) the key selling point with this new phone is the design. The chassis is precisely the same as on the iPhone 5 and iPhone 5S, and beyond coming in rose gold, doesn't offer anything new at all.

That said, so many people are looking at the iPhone's evolution to the 4.7-inch display of the 6, 6S, 7 and 8 and scrunched their noses up a bit, not wanting to make the leap to the larger size of screen (and that's before we even get into the Plus size models).

The iPhone SE is designed to be easily operated with one hand, the 4-inch screen sitting just at the edge of a thumb stretch, and Apple is banking on this fact keeping the handset current.

However, internally things are genuinely supercharged, a world away from the innards stuffed into the handset from a few years back. The camera had an overhaul, coming with the 12MP iSight sensor found in iPhone 6S, and offering the same array of tricks.

That means Focus Pixels to offer clearer and faster autofocus, the improved two-tone flash and Live Photos, where a small amount of video is captured with every photo taken. 4K video recording and ultra-slo-mo movie modes really help sweeten the deal too.

The power of the iPhone SE is something to behold as well - it's as powerful as the iPhone 6S and 6S Plus thanks to having the A9 chip, the M9 co-processor and 2GB of RAM.

Compare that to the A7 chip with a measly 1GB of RAM from the iPhone 5S and side by side they're absolutely night and day in terms of speed and battery life management.

The M9 co-processor is an important element too, telling the phone when it should be heading into a dormant mode thanks to being sat quietly on a desk or in a pocket, which prevents the battery-hungry pings that lead to the red line of doom and you needing to reach for the charger at 6PM.

Battery life is impressive on the phone, especially when you consider there are only a few mAh added in here, from 1,560mAh to 1,624mAh, and with no increase to the size of the chassis at all, this is a really impressive feat and addresses one of the key concerns we had with the iPhone 5S.

Design identical to iPhone 5 / 5S apart from new rose gold variant

Very easy to hold and use in one hand

The design of the iPhone SE, as you've probably already guessed, is identical to that of the iPhone 5S.

That means you've got the same compact chassis that fits perfectly in one hand, the chamfered edges to provide a different texture and comfort to the edge of the phone and the same overall boxy design from the days of yore.

In fact, visually the only difference is the thing now comes in rose gold. That's it.

The phone does indeed fit well in the palm, with almost no stretching needed to get to all parts of the screen. What's surprising is how Apple hasn't drawn in any design elements from the iPhone 6S, keeping things like the 'battery-like' + and - icons on the volume keys, the larger drilled holes of the speaker grille at the bottom of the phone and the power button living on the top of the handset.

It makes sense, I guess. After all, they were well made then, and they're as premium-looking now. The finish on the metal chassis is always impressive from Apple, and combined with the new rose gold color always makes me feel like I'm looking at a high end phone when glancing at the display on my desk.

What's funny is that one of the same issues I had with the older model, which I thought was just a slight manufacturing defect, is back once again. If you shake the phone at all, something will rattle - the power button doesn't seem properly attached on some level.

Clearly this is a design point Apple is fine with, else it would have been eradicated a few years later when rebooting the phone's design - it's irritating though, as it diminishes the iPhone SE's premium feel.

I do like the smaller design though, despite the fact I'm firmly a fan of larger phones these days. It's almost a novelty having something so capable that I can use one-handed, and it's surprising that so many brands have shied away from doing the same thing.

In terms of weight, it's super hard to even tell you've even got the phone in your pocket, thanks to it being 113g light. That's a whole 1g more than the 5S, but it's impossible to tell the difference.

The 'click' and pressure needed on all the buttons remains perfect, with the feedback feeling like it's the result of months (or in this case, years) of honing.

From the mute rocker switch to the volume keys, I'm a real fan of the way this phone has been put together (although I wish it wasn't just one mono speaker firing out the bottom of the phone.)

However, my biggest bugbear with Apple (and phone brands in general) is that this is a backwards step in terms of phone design. Yes, it's a popular shape (as the quick survey on the train proved), but the identical iPhone SE is nothing but a 'bonus' version of the 5S.

I'm fully behind Apple's decision to bring the raw power of its flagship phones to the smaller form factor, but it could have rebooted the design quite easily. Why are we not seeing a smaller phone with the same curved edges of the iPhone 6S, a smaller, pebble-like experience in the hand? Now that would have been exciting.

It's easy to see why the form remains though: the brand has surely invested in the manufacturing processes to create the iPhone 5 and 5S, and rather than cover them in a dust sheet has cranked them into use once more.

It's a great exercise in cost saving, and while you can ask why one of the richest companies in the world needs to keep its margins as high as possible when it could afford to take this hit... well, there's a reason it's so wealthy.

That said, I firmly believe that every phone, to be considered a success and a step forward, needs to be obviously different from its predecessor, to make the user feel like they're getting something new for their money.

The angled sides seen on the iPhone SE were brilliant in 2010 when they appeared on the iPhone 4, but they're tired now, so the SE will always feel like only a small, if powerful, update.

Screen

Screen still disappointingly low-res

Screen brightness is too dark compared to other comparable phones

Another issue I've got here with the new iPhone is the screen - like the chassis, it's straight out of 2012, coming as it did with the iPhone 5. While you could just think that it's simply a smaller version of what's on the current iPhone duo, in truth it's rather old in terms of spec.

Of course it's a Retina display, Apple's shorthand for a phone that hits a certain sharpness at a certain distance from your eyes - but in a 4-inch display, there's a noticeable lack of sharpness here.

Apple's always focused more on the quality of the display than pixel density - its iPad range is industry-leading when it comes to having a great-looking screen, rather than shoving in more pixels for the sake of it.

But when Samsung is easily making the best smartphone screens in the world, and even the iPhone 8 is stuck on a 720p display, I'd have hoped for a little bit of an upgrade for the iPhone SE. Instead it's used the same LCD and digitizer layer as found on the older models (again, likely to save money on production) and as a result it's clearly less sharp and lower quality than the flagship brands.

The key thing for any brand in making a quality phone is making sure four pillars are present and correct: great design, non-annoying battery life, good camera and quality screen. After all, it's the bit you stare at most.

Apple's not stupid though - this display is more than good enough. The lower contrast ratio (800:1 is quite far behind some of the top phones on the market right now - the new iPhone 6S duo included) is probably the most irksome element, but in terms of sharpness the 4-inch display handles the 1334x750 resolution adequately.

One thing I didn't miss a jot was 3D Touch. I still like the idea of a screen that has levels of pressure response baked right in, but I constantly forgot the feature was there on the larger iPhone (although it has got better over the years).

While it would have been nice to have the option on the SE, it's not like I ever felt the experience was compromised by its omission.

And when viewing Live Photos in the gallery app, the simple long press on the screen activated the mini-video just fine. On the iPhone 6S you need to prod the screen a little harder to get the motion going - it just seems like overkill when it's so easy to do without the technology on the SE.

Movies, music and gaming

Excellent sound performance

Screen is too small for extended movie watching

Sound out of single speaker isn't powerful

Gaming is so impressive on a phone this small

The main issue I encountered with the iPhone SE's screen was when watching movies. The Retina display can't even display the lower end of HD movies... but that does make buying them a little cheaper, I guess.

The sharpness looked OK actually - better than I was expecting / remembered from the iPhone 5S. But I've become used to a much more vivid and visible screen, and watching any kind of 'atmospheric' (read: a bit darker) movie meant I had to fire the brightness right up.

As you'll see in our battery tests later, this had far less effect than on older Apple phones as the improved internals help improve power management on the iPhone SE, but I'd rather not have to fire the brightness right up on my phone just to watch a movie.

Gaming was a similar experience, with the power of the iPhone SE easily taking on any title that needed a bit of raw grunt to run smoothly. Real Racing 3 still looks great - and is a great benchmark to test whether a lot of fast action can be handled on screen at once.

But other games, like Warhammer 40,000 Freeblade, ran super smoothly even with loads going on throughout the screen - it's weird to see such a thing, like a Ferrari engine shoved into a small Fiat but somehow fitting in well.

In short, the performance of the iPhone SE is astounding given the size and what Apple's had to fit in the smaller chassis.

And that includes the excellent audio reproduction I've come to expect from the Cupertino-based brand. I've not got the audiophilic ears that some of my TechRadar colleagues possess, so my main rule of thumb is usually 'does it sound SUPER TERRIBLE Y/N?'

But a couple of times, paired with some decent Marshall headphones, the iPhone SE caught me by surprise with the audio clarity of just listening to average quality songs on Spotify. Apple's iPod heritage is still going strong here, despite the lack of overt support for the new wave of Hi-Res sound files.

Similar power levels to iPhone 6S, meaning speedy app opening

Works very fluidly under the finger

Fingerprint scanner is slower than current models, but not hugely noticeable

Are you wondering how impressive the iPhone SE is under the finger? Well, the answer is simple: very good indeed. There are a number of factors at work here, from the fact it shares an A9 chipset with the latest iPhones to the doubling of the RAM seen in the iPhone 5S - everything is much faster than expected.

The graphical upgrade is probably the most marked improvement - it's a six-core chip that dwarfs the power of the iPhone 5S and even the iPhone 6, making me wonder why anyone would buy 2014's iPhone other than wanting the larger screen at a lower price.

GeekBench 3 benchmarking offers some interesting stats: the iPhone SE matches the 6S duo almost perfectly, and slightly outdoes them, in fact. The result of 4438 is a shade ahead of 2015's flagships, likely to do with having to power fewer pixels, and is almost twice as good as the performance from the iPhone 6 - this really is an impressive amount of power for the small phone.

The other performance indicators - movies, gaming and audio output - have all be covered in the section above, and while the screen does mar the film-watching experience somewhat, the sheer quality of the images whether from the camera or on the display is impressive.

If you're wondering how much storage you've got to play with here, the good news is that it's raised up to 32GB minimum, with a 128GB highest-capacity option at the top end.

It's much better than the original 16GB option - with the operating system on board too, it gives more space to use.

Touch ID

Another curious / money-saving move from Apple is the use of a last-gen Touch ID sensor, which means it's not quite as fast as the latest option on the newer phones. It's an odd choice, given it surely can't cost a huge amount to offer the functionality, but then again given this phone has a lower cost than the iPhone 6S, perhaps Apple's looking to shave every margin it can.

It's another example of the small sacrifices you'll have to make if you go for the iPhone SE over the larger model - nothing major and it won't bug you too much, but not as good as it could be. It's worth noting the speed of opening is pretty fast still, and you'd only notice if you came from one of the newer iPhones.

And this Touch ID is still good enough to enable Apple Pay, so you'll be easily able to use the small phone to pay for goods wherever contactless is enabled. And the smaller size seems to make it easier to find the trigger point for the NFC chip, as it was a complete cinch to pay for a few beers with this thing. Worryingly.

Interface

It's hard to talk about the interface on an iPhone because, well, I'd be hugely surprised if you don't know it already. Most people reading this article will already be iPhone users, and those that aren't will probably know how one works, such is its iconic status in the smartphone world.

I will say that the 4-inch screen is the perfect portal for iOS 10 though, with the one-handed nature of operating the iPhone SE perfect for doing EVERYTHING from checking notifications to turning on the torch or activating flight mode - and iOS 11 even better thanks to the recent upgrade.

The simplicity of the system seems to fit better in one hand - when you start employing a second palm to navigate around a phone, I think you've got more license to get a bit more complex in your tapping patterns.

One area that is a slight concern - and one that I'm struggling to work out if it's just a worry because I'm used to much larger phones these days - is the keyboard.

It's fortunate that Apple's upgraded its default keyboard in recent years, as the older version was just terrible. Add to that the cramped conditions on offer with the iPhone SE's smaller screen and I found typing very difficult on this phone.

You can, of course, download a new keyboard from someone like SwiftKey, and this will add in the ability to swipe your words out - I wish the default Apple keyboard had this, as it would be perfect on the smaller iPhone SE screen here.

But overall, it's hard to fault Apple's OS in terms of raw predictability and speed. I'll never be happy until Cook's Crew finally gives us contextual menus (I mean, SURELY it makes more sense to put the ability to change the camera settings in the camera app itself?) but beyond that it's hard to say there's much wrong with iOS.

It's only those that like the idea of customization, to change nearly every element of the phone, that sneer at the platform - and for them, Android is just perfect.

The update will land this Fall, and brings with it a completely redesigned App Store, a reworked Control Center, seamless lock screen and notification screens, improved camera and photos apps and a whole lot more.

The iPhone SE somehow manages to not only build in a much better battery than the iPhone 5S, but it does so with no extra chassis space to cram extra electrons.

Despite that, Apple has managed to shrink down some of the components inside to plop a slightly larger power unit inside the SE, up from 1560mAh to 1624mAh (and that's more impressive when you consider the iPhone 5 had a 1440mAh power pack).

In our testing though, it was a mixed bag. While it's hard to truly remember how much battery I used to get through on an average day with the iPhone 5S, we do remember it being rather terrible a lot of the time.

It'd regularly be down to 20% by the evening when leaving work - enough to be in the red zone at times - which was a terrible performance for any phone, let alone a top-end flagship handset.

The good news is the iPhone SE is much more capable - but then again, you'd expect that from a phone that's had two years of development, a leaner operating system and the M9 co-processor all to ease the strain on the troubled power unit.

That said, it's fairly easy to run it down quickly, with some days seeing me need to switch on Low Power Mode early at 35% to make sure I made it through the day.

It's fair to say these are the higher-usage days, with things like tethering an iPad and a couple of hours of video watching at full brightness in the mix, but the new glut of flagship handsets are all capable of easily lasting a day with such pressure put on the battery life, and it puts the performance of the iPhone SE into the spotlight.

You'd think the above scenario, where watching video at such a high brightness, would be the obvious reason of the battery diminishing so much - nope, not in this case.

While a trip into the battery settings tries to tell me that video is the biggest battery guzzler out there, the phone was charged to 100% at 10.30AM, a 90 minute Full HD video was run at full brightness and the iPhone SE was left on a desk.

How to improve your iPhone battery life - watch the video below:

It only dropped 20% in that time - and while that's far from the best performance we've seen the iPhone SE managed a score that's slightly above average, which is a damningly good result for an iPhone.

So why did it need such massaging come 18.00 that evening? It seems that, despite the co-processor trying to manage down battery life, the iPhone is still a bit chatty when it comes to battery consumption, pinging a little bit here and there and gradually dribbling down.

However, we're keen to reiterate that this was a heavy day on the phone - over the time we've had with it, it's generally been capable of lasting more than long enough for me to not get annoyed.

If you're upgrading to this phone from the iPhone 5 or 5S, you'll be in dreamland with the battery life, trust us.

12MP sensor the equal of iPhone 6S

Heavy focus on 'realism' in snaps

Picture quality seems a little muted at times

Smaller and less sharp screen not as useful as a viewfinder

The 12MP camera on the iPhone SE is a marked upgrade from that in the 5S or 5 in a number of ways, not just the boost in megapixels.

It's imbued with all manner of fancy technology that you just wouldn't have found on the earlier models - and, in fact, is another perfect example of Apple giving iPhone SE users the same toys as found on the larger 6S.

Firstly, the 12MP sensor comes with Focus Pixels, which are a secondary layer within the camera that works out what the phone is being pointed at and sharpens things up rather quickly. It's not the best in the industry, but it's more than quick enough and if you've got a millisecond to hold the camera steady you'll generally get a sharp snap each time.

Live Photos is added into the mix too, and while we were sceptical when we first saw the feature on the 6S, we can't deny that it does enhance some snaps (there's a surprise foam party that wouldn't have been the same without the feature).

It's also the sapphire covering on the camera that's a decent upgrade too - so many pictures on older phones are now fuzzy and seemingly covered in a smeared layer, such are the micro-scratches that festoon the cover.

By making this stronger Apple has removed one of the big issues that can plague the iPhone SE in its later life, and I love that it's now flush with the chassis thanks to being a little thicker. It's hard to say why, but the clean lines on the back are so much more pleasant.

Settings-wise, the iPhone sticks to simplicity, keeping only the options you want front and center. That means you can toggle on HDR or Live Photos, toggle the timer or flash and add an effect. Square mode remains for easier Instagram pics, and the video and slo-mo modes are within an easy swipe.

When using the camera there's only so much you can change when you're snapping - there's no professional setting to play with. When tapping the screen to focus a simple slide up or down with your finger will alter the exposure, but if you're looking to change color temperature or aperture speed, you'll need to install a specific app.

We're fans of the way Apple does things here. Cameras should be simple first and foremost, getting out of the way to let you take the best snap possible, rather than worrying you that you're not using the right settings in the correct places.

HDR becoming automatic really makes a difference too - while the mode has less of an effect now the iPhone packs a rather decent camera and usually captures more tone and detail than in previous years, we still got improved pictures when it fired automatically.

Let's get onto the actual camera quality. It's, obviously, pretty good - and because the iPhone 6S' camera has already been dissected and impresses, we were fully expecting the same to be happening here.

Apple's phones always err on the side of natural pictures - which sounds like a great thing, but we're not always so sure. While it's great to have natural skin tones and more neutral colors to match more closely to what the eye is seeing, other phones add a slight richness to snaps that makes them 'pop' off the screen.

We're not saying that this will be the sort of thing many people like, but we kept feeling like the pictures we were getting off the iPhone SE were a little muted in comparison to something like the Samsung Galaxy S7.

The iPhone SE also has a decent low-light mode, although again it's not the best around. It is, however, still brilliant at getting pictures in darker scenes, and for that alone it gets a tick from us.

Our only bugbear with this camera really comes from the size of the phone. We found that it was too small to properly wield when framing a shot - while it was easier to hold, and thus more steady, we really pined for a larger viewfinder to see what was going to be capturing.

We maintain that a good photo is the one that you want to share, and the smaller 4-inch display meant we weren't always sure we'd got something brilliant, having to zoom in and out to check clarity etc.

The smaller screen also made it harder to use the volume-down key to take pictures one handed, as we kept covering a portion of the screen with our palm. It's not a big deal, and one that we probably wouldn't feel if we weren't coming from a larger phone.

But in this instance it's worth pointing to the larger phones as a superior photographic experience - in terms of holding the phone if you're thinking of sticking with the iPhone, or just checking out the brilliant snapping ability of the Galaxy S7.

Camera samples

This review is directly aimed at those upgrading from one of Apple's smaller phones from many years ago, because that's who the iPhone SE is more likely aimed at these days.

It sees the older form factor as a beloved chassis. Many people will love the smaller screen and it fits in the hand much better than the gargantuan phones on the market right now.

Writing an iPhone review is different to other handsets. You're generally writing for an audience that has little interest in comparable Android phones as they're 'locked in' to the ecosystem, and price is generally less of an issue too, users prepared to pay more to get the iPhone.

So with that in mind - has Apple made the perfect iPhone for the niche of people that have been holding off buying a bigger handset for as long as possible?

We liked

The iPhone SE's biggest draw is its size - and we know, that's obvious. But if it weren't for the fact it's so easily operated one-handed, it would be impossible to see why Apple made this phone at all.

The smaller size definitely feels great in the hand and the pocket - and whether you're slipping it into a bag, a running armband or just holding it gripped while walking along it's a much more palatable design.

Obviously the power the SE's been imbued with is impressive too - and considering the amount of grunt Apple's managed to stick into the smaller phone, we're surprised it doesn't run hotter or have a poorer battery life.

While it's not industry leading, it's an iPhone with a good battery life, which many will love - it's not as good at holding battery as other iPhones for watching media, but it's a step forward over the 5S generally.

The camera is powerful and sharp too - again, for the upgraders out there they'll be astounded by the changes (our friend recently couldn't stop taking side-by-side pictures with the SE and an old 5, such was the difference).

We disliked

The design of the phone isn't 'iconic' - it's dated. There's no reason Apple couldn't have created a smaller version of the iPhone 6S other than saving money - while that cost has been passed onto the consumer, it would have been amazing to see a new phone in this space.

The screen technology is what irritates me the most - and yes, we know it's a price tradeoff. But, bar some small tweaks, this is a very similar display to what we saw on the iPhone 5 from 2012. Nearly four years old, and it's being reused here - and it's how things look on the screen that matters.

It's adequate - but compared to other phones you can get for the price (and we know, they're a lot less wieldy) the difference is marked.

Whatever you do, don't look at the iPhone SE's screen then some of the expensive phones on the market right now (ie the iPhone X). You'll be a bit sad.

Verdict

With the iPhone SE, Apple's fixed a big problem: price. Given the internals on offer here, this would have been close to a perfect phone if it weren't for a few glaring omissions.

Firstly, we needed a new design for this to be seen as the next step in the 4-inch phone cycle. And it's not like Apple doesn't have a perfectly brilliant design just waiting there to be retooled, rounded edges combined with a more palm-friendly shape. Man, that would have been amazing.

The screen also had to be better for this to be seen as a brilliant phone. It's fine, and in some instances still looks sharp.

But compared to the rest of the market, it's been left behind - but then again, Apple needed to make some savings to keep its high margins on the iPhone, and this was clearly one of those (the cost of making those screens is reportedly a lot lower than it was a few years ago as processes have improved).

Will the iPhone SE pull in any Android users fed up with having to wrap their hands around devices they consider too big? Actually, yes - such is the clamour I hear from people not wedded to any particular brand for a phone that 'I can use one handed'.

There are two ways of looking at this phone from Apple: on the one hand, it's the perfect 4-inch phone, coming with so much power, a great camera and improved battery life, all wrapped in Apple's well-crafted iPhone chassis and delivering true simplicity with iOS.

We know that combination will have people falling over themselves to buy the phone.

On the other hand, it's just 2011's design rebadged and a new engine put inside. Far from being a new phone, it's the iPhone 5SS, another iteration on an old design - but one that's a lot cheaper to buy. It's also got a much smaller screen, where it's proved that larger displays are the popular choice now, with apps in particular making use of the extra space.

Ultimately, Apple's given consumers a great choice here and actually for a half-decent price. The iPhone SE is a brilliant phone for those that want something smaller in their pocket and don't care about tired design - and we suspect there will be quite a few of those buyers out there.

First reviewed: April 2016

Not convinced this is the phone for you? Then these are the ones to check out:

iPhone 7

Want the latest and greatest iPhone? The iPhone 7 is the best on the market right now and has a far nicer design than the iPhone SE.

Problem is you'll lose the useful 3.5mm headphone jack if you were to choose the iPhone 7 and it's going to be a lot more expensive than the iPhone SE.

It does come with the latest A10 Fusion processor, 4.7-inch screen and upgraded camera to make it that little bit more attractive though.

iPhone 5S

OK, we get it. You want the iPhone, but you want the smaller size. The issue you've got is with the higher price. Well, in that case maybe you should look at the iPhone 5S - still on sale in many places despite being launched in 2013.

It's got the same chassis and screen technology as the SE, but it's in the speed and battery life areas that this phone will struggle - then again, if you're not revving it with loads of apps or relying on it to entertain you all day then you'll probably be OK.

Best to buy it SIM free though - this thing might not be supported by Apple in a couple of years.

Samsung Galaxy S7

This phone doesn't fit into any of the categories above: it's not an iPhone, it's not a small phone and it's not cheap. But it is one of the very best handsets around at the moment, with a superb camera, loads of power and the ability to charge on any wireless pad you happen to have lying around.

The design is rather neat too, with the back of the phone curving away nicely thanks to a new '3D thermoforming' process.

In actual fact, I think the Galaxy S7 Edge is the better phone, but chose this one as the Edge is an even bigger device - it's worth checking out though.

]]>http://www.techradar.com/reviews/phones/mobile-phones/iphone-se-1317464/reviewNintendo Labohttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/techradar/tech-reviews/~3/qov5K-9KOSQ/nintendo-labo
http://www.techradar.com/reviews/nintendo-laboWe got hands-on with the DIY marvel, Nintendo Labo. Fri, 16 Mar 2018 11:31:10 +0000techradar.com[Update: We've updated our Nintendo Labo hands on review to include some footage of the Toy-Con garage feature that's been recently released by Nintendo. Though we were able to see this feature in action at the event we attended, we weren't allowed to capture any footage of it. Now you can see this interesting and innovative aspect of Labo for yourself below.]

There are very few companies (gaming or otherwise) that could announce a cardboard accessory line and receive a rapturous response. Nintendo happens one of those very few companies.

Announced earlier this year, Nintendo Labo is a new peripheral for the Nintendo Switch which involves constructing a variety of controllers (known as Toy-Cons) from cardboard and combining them with the console’s Joy-Cons to play games.

Remember on the mornings of your birthday or Christmas when your parents would despair as you threw aside expensive presents in favor of getting inside their boxes? That’s the side of you that Nintendo is trying to reach. ‘For kids and those who are kids at heart’ the announcement stated.

Now, if we’re totally honest we don’t really see ourselves as kids at heart any more. We’re not saying if you opened us up you’d find a weakly beating misanthropic raisin, but the childish sense of wonder and imagination that had us clambering into empty boxes and turning them into rocket ships is thoroughly out of practice.

Nintendo encourages Toy-Con customization

It’s to Labo’s credit, then, that we had a lot of fun with it. Everything about the Labo demo we attended encouraged a feeling of excitable discovery – from the science museum setting, to the school desk-style demo stations equipped with stickers, glue and all manner of coloring pens.

It’s pretty clear at this point that Nintendo is letting the Xboxes and PlayStations of the world chase the best graphics and the the most powerful components. There’s no point in the Switch creator trying to compete there anymore. Instead Nintendo is setting itself apart by focusing on something very simple – fun and play.

With the Switch we have a console that attempts to remove any and all barriers to play. With Labo we have an accessory that uses this hardware to show that fun is more than good graphics and tight mechanics – it’s also our own creativity and imagination.

How does it work?

Labo uses some pretty simple technology in an innovative way. On the right Joy-Con of the Nintendo Switch there’s an infrared sensor and on each Toy-Con construction there are selectively placed infrared stickers. Working together with the motion controls within the Joy-Cons, the infrared sensor and stickers communicate and allow you to use the Toy-Cons to interact with one another or what’s happening on the Nintendo Switch screen.

When you start it up, you’ll find Nintendo Labo has three sections: Make, Play, and Discover. The Make section contains all of the instructional guides for putting together your Toy-Cons; Play is the place where you’ll find all of the relevant mini games (each Toy-Con has at least one); and Discover is the place where you can find out more about how the Toy-Cons work and what you can do with them. It’s also the place where you’ll find the Toy-Con Garage, but we’ll come back to that later.

Ease of use

Each of the Nintendo Labo Toy-Cons are DIY – it’s like IKEA for fun as opposed to dull function. The first thing we built was the fairly simple RC car, which took around ten to 15 minutes. After you’ve opened up the Nintendo Labo app on your Switch console and selected what you’re putting together, the construction instructions will appear on screen.

Fortunately, this isn’t a ‘Homer Simpson building a barbecue’ scenario – the instructions are very easy to follow and the Labo app clearly lays out which pieces you need, how to fold them, how to bring them together and how long the process is likely to take.

If you can’t quite figure something out, it’s possible to move an on-screen 3D model using the Switch’s touch screen in order to see it from different angles, as well as fast-forward and rewind the instructions. Sometimes we found the instructions were a little too helpful and we found ourselves fast-forwarding through large chunks. When three piano keys are identical, we'd rather not be told how to put them together three separate times.

The cardboard sheets can look overwhelming at first

When your Toy-Con is constructed, you simply slide the Joy-Cons into it as directed. It’s actually surprising how secure they feel in the cardboard and we weren’t worried about them slipping out and crashing to the floor.

Construction complexity and time varies from Toy-Con to Toy-Con. Before you start building you can see an estimate of how long the project is likely to take so you can be sure you have enough time for what you’re taking on.

Nintendo correctly estimated ten to 15 minutes for the RC car. The fishing rod, on the other hand, could take as long as two and a half hours. We tried putting together the piano Toy-Con with the help of a partner and it took us just over an hour to construct the main body.

The Robot Kit looks like a day-long challenge to us. How long before we start to see speed-runs of Nintendo Labo constructions?

Nintendo also encourages customization of Toy-Cons, and, honestly, we could have spent hours on this alone. Using colored pens, markers, tape, glue and googly eyes of all sizes it’s possible to turn your simple RC car into anything you please.

An RC car in the early stages of construction

Nintendo Labo games

Nintendo Labo offers a range of experiences and we got to try out everything within the Labo Variety pack, which included the RC car, the fishing rod, the doll house, the motorbike, and the piano.

It’s actually quite difficult to choose a favorite Toy-Con experience because they all feel very distinct and worthwhile in their own ways. The fishing rod, while repetitive, is exceptionally addictive. But we probably spent the longest amount of time with the doll house as a result of its mix-and-match accessories, which opened up several mini games. The fact that there’s an adorable creature living in the house that you get to play with and feed jelly beans also helped.

The Labo doll house has several accessories, all of which allow for different on-screen interactions

Labo’s experiences feel much more like mobile games than console games in terms of depth and appearance, but given that the construction of the Toy-Cons is clearly a big part of the fun, we don’t think this is to its detriment.

Each Toy-Con has its own experience, though it’s worth noting that the fishing rod and the piano have additional experiences. The fishing rod also has an aquarium game, where you can see and feed the fish you’ve caught in the main game, as well as use the piano Toy-Con to create your very own fish. The piano also has a live studio game, which allows you to play music and record it to share.

Though the games are simple, they’re afforded an unprecedented level of wonder and engagement thanks to the unique nature of their controls. It’s hard not to get a kick out of a simple fishing game when you’re using a functioning cardboard rod that was built by your very own hands. They also work seamlessly - there’s no delay between your movements and what happens on screen, and we were impressed by just how smooth everything is.

It’s refreshing to see the Joy-Con’s much-hyped HD Rumble feature get so much use after the flash in the pan that was 1-2 Switch. It offers key in-game feedback for the fishing rod and it’s even the driving force of the RC Cars.

As fun as the games are, though, we also got a look at something called the Toy-Con Garage. This can be found in Labo’s Discover section and it allows you to get far more creative with your Toy-Cons by reprogramming them to work in different ways.

It’s essentially a simple, and highly visual, cause-and-effect programming experience. You can decide which input you want, choose an action, and then select the output result of that action. For example, you can take the left Joy-Con as an input, decide you want shaking it to be the action, and say that will then cause the right Joy-Con to vibrate. Take a look at the feature in the official footage below:

Though we imagine there will be more official Nintendo kits released in the future, this has a great deal of potential as a means of reprogramming existing Toy-Con constructions to do other things and greatly extending the potential life of any kit. For example, we were shown how using the Garage can allow you to use the motorbike handlebars to control your RC car, or use the fishing rod to play the piano music game.

The Nintendo Labo motorbike handles

Because Labo comes with IR stickers, there are even opportunities to create your very own Toy-Cons - we were shown one video where someone had managed to create a working cardboard vending machine. We really hope Nintendo creates an online community similar to Lego’s where Labo owners are able to submit and share blueprints and ideas for their own Toy-Cons.

Because they’re not particularly deep, we can’t see kids plugging hours into simply playing the Labo games themselves. But the entire process of putting your Toy-Con together and playing with it certainly will pass a few hours. The fact that Labo kits contain several toys – and therefore many hours of construction and play – means they seem like rather good value for money.

Rather than having children sit quietly with a Switch console, Nintendo has developed something that allows them to feel directly involved in the creation of the games they play. It’s the kind of digital toy which could be a great way for parents to spend time with their kids.

Labo’s experiences are simple but we imagine kids will get a kick out of having been part of the process of making them happen because we sure did. It fosters a kind of immersion and investment that virtual and augmented reality have no hope of beating right now.

A fishing rod with a fully-functioning crank

Durability

Anyone who’s seen Toy Story 3 knows how terrifyingly careless kids can be with toys and this gives us some reservations about the Toy-Cons. When we were using Labo, the cardboard felt pretty durable, tactile and holding it was comfortable.

But this is in a single half day of play with an adult whose caution and perfectionism means they pose little danger to a petal never mind a piece of cardboard. Though we were assured of Labo’s long-term durability, we can’t help but feel the cardboard will start to wear over time and it’s likely users will have to take a great deal of care when it comes to storage.

You would hope that if children have made and customized the Toy-Cons themselves they’d have a sense of pride and ownership towards them that would encourage care. Of course, this means that in the event of an accident, despair has the potential to be tenfold. We’re looking forward to using the Toy-Cons over a longer period of time in our full review to determine whether our reservations are justified or not.

Price and release date

Nintendo Labo will come to the US and Australia on April 20, while the UK will see it a week later on April 27. There will be two kits available at launch: the $70 / £59.99 / AU$100 variety pack which includes the RC car, fishing rod, house and motorbike Toy-Cons. And the $80 / £69.99/ AU$120 Robot Kit.

We liked

Nintendo Labo is definitely as much about making as it is playing, and we really enjoyed the fact that it's possible to get hours of fun out of it before you even start playing the games. The technology behind the kit isn't overly complex but it's extremely smooth and efficient, and we were impressed by the complete lack of lag between Toy-Con movement and on-screen action.

We were also excited about the potential of Toy-Con garage - not only does this mode have great educational potential, it encourages creativity and greatly extends the life of any Nintendo Labo kit for those willing to dig in and experiment.

We disliked

Though the fact that the Labo Toy-Cons are cardboard is a huge selling point, we couldn't help but feel nervous using any kind of force with them. We have to wonder about the durability of the Toy-Cons and the possible inconvenience of storing them once constructed, both in terms of keeping them safe and finding adequate space.

And appreciative of the in-depth instructions as we were, we were very glad it's possible to fast-forward through them as they can sometimes go into the nitty-gritty a little too much.

Early verdict

As first impressions go, Nintendo Labo makes a good one. Though we know we’re not the target audience for the product, we still enjoyed our time with it and we can absolutely see kids having a blast with it.

Nintendo Labo is an interesting toy because it doesn’t offer instant gratification. This isn’t plug and play, and a great deal of the fun comes from the act of putting the cardboard controllers together. Whether you win or lose, Nintendo Labo guarantees you a sense of achievement and it's very much a case of getting out what you put in.

Bearing in mind that we’re really not the target audience for Labo, we took some time to observe the kids around the room using it and over three and half hours we didn't see one looking bored, which gave us a great deal of faith.

As much as it’s about play, we get the sense Labo has a great deal of potential when it comes to learning – creativity and problem solving skills are definitely engaged and developed here and, honestly, we can’t help but wonder if Nintendo is quietly creating the next generation of game designers. It’s like an early introduction to the thinking processes behind programming – while many games have us learn their mechanics to successfully play, in some ways Labo has us play to learn more about mechanics.

Certainly, we can see a lot of educational potential with Labo and we don’t think it would look out of place in classrooms, particularly when the programming features of Toy-Con Garage come into play.

Despite some reservations about the durability of the Toy-Cons, we have high hopes for Nintendo Labo at the moment and we’re looking forward to inspecting it further in our full review.

]]>http://www.techradar.com/reviews/nintendo-laboSamsung Galaxy S9
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/techradar/tech-reviews/~3/BJ83x9AcjGc/samsung-galaxy-s9-review
http://www.techradar.com/reviews/samsung-galaxy-s9-reviewThe S9 is an upgrade on last year's phone, but not by much - although the camera is still a standout featureFri, 16 Mar 2018 09:58:31 +0000techradar.comThe Samsung Galaxy S9 is now on the shelves, a phone that promises to be one of the best of 2018 - but at first glance, might not seem to be that much of an upgrade.

That's because it's very, very similar in design to the Galaxy S8 that debuted this time last year - Samsung might as well have called this the Galaxy S8S, if that wouldn't have been too obvious (and unwieldy as a name).

That said, there are some key differences between the phones that will give you a headache over whether to upgrade: far more power, a more robust frame and a camera that destroys pretty much everything else out there in terms of low-light performance.

It also fixes one of the key issues we had with the Galaxy S8 - namely, that you couldn't easily unlock the phone because the biometric opening was so poor. You've also got AR Emoji, which is something of a novelty, but something different you'll want to play with.

There are also dual speakers for the first time on a Galaxy S phone from Samsung, alongside the usual water-resistance... something we've already become too blase about. We can chuck our phones in water, for crying out loud. That's amazing.

But these plus points are all set against a backdrop of a very high price; we’re not talking iPhone X levels here, but it’s still one of the more expensive options you can buy. The larger Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus with a 6.2-inch screen is even pricier.

So if you’re looking to replace a 2016 phone do all the new features really offer enough to make the Galaxy S9 a worthwhile upgrade, or is the cheaper Galaxy S8 still the best phone in the world?

Price and release date

The Samsung Galaxy S9 release date was March 16, with pre-orders being delivered slightly ahead of this around the world - so you're able to buy it now.

The Galaxy S9 is on sale for £739, $719.99, or AU$1,199 SIM-free directly from Samsung, but exact pricing for other markets is currently unclear.

In the UK, that's a huge price jump over last year's handset, which cost £689 at launch, and it's the same price our sources reported before it was made official.

In terms of a UK cost on contract you can expect to pay between £35 and £50 per month for a decent slug of data, although with many contracts you’ll need to pay a little upfront too.

In the US, we're seeing around $30 a month for the contract, and between $720-$800 for the phone itself. It's actually a little cheaper in the US compared to the Galaxy S8, bucking the trend we're seeing in other regions worldwide.

There aren’t any storage variants of this phone though in the UK or US, with only the 64GB option on sale.

AR Emoji

Too much of a novelty

Needs a more powerful facial recognition

It took us a little while to come around to the idea of AR Emoji... and then not too long to get bored by them again.

Let's be honest here: these are a clear response to Apple's Animoji, which gained a lot of attention when the iPhone X launched, and which make use of the TrueDepth camera on the front of the iPhone X.

Samsung's offering feels like a watered-down version of this, albeit one with a bit more personality. To create your own little avatar you simply smile into the front-facing camera, and the Galaxy S9 creates your own digital version of you.

Once it’s created, you can change your avi’s hair and skin color and choose an outfit – it's a shame there aren't more customisation options here, as the outfits are a bit limited and the hair colors aren’t particularly nuanced.

This may seem like a tiny thing, but if you can't make your AR Emoji look like you then you – and your friends – are going to struggle to engage with it.

The GIF emoji are fun, but get tired quickly

In our testing we found that we needed to create our avatar a few times, as there were occasional glitches like a weird face shape or the wrong-colored eyes.

We also had to get used to the fact that it doesn't look like us all the time, although in some of the instantly-generated GIFs you can use for social media we suddenly saw that our AR Emoji mimicked some of our features well from different angles.

Those GIFs are probably the best thing about this new feature – and they get tiresome relatively quickly. You send a few to friends on compatible apps (the AR Emoji GIFs are baked into the Galaxy S9's keyboard, but you can't add them in Twitter or Gmail, only in apps like WhatsApp at the moment), but the novelty wears off pretty quickly.

The other thing you can do is record a video of yourself speaking as the AR Emoji... and this is where things start to unravel. The Galaxy S9 picks up most of your features, but also gives your avatar a little flickering mouth or eye at times when the camera loses you.

It shows that, to make this feature work properly, brands need a more powerful camera, rather than just relying on software and the front-facing option.

AR Emoji are fun for a little while, but on their own they're certainly not a reason to buy this phone.

Bixby is back... and better

Bixby Voice is still behind

Bixby Vision is far more useful

Bixby Vision returns more results... but some are not as accurate as others.

We were thoroughly disappointed by Bixby on the Galaxy S8 last year, as it promised to be the ultimate digital assistant and, well, it wasn't.

It simply couldn't do enough – it wasn’t able to work out what you wanted contextually, and it wasn’t able to start or control enough apps. We could forgive the gestation period for this feature if it wasn't for the fact that Google Assistant is already on the phone, and incredibly capable.

However, Samsung has upgraded Bixby on the Galaxy S9, and kept the Bixby button on the side of the device to allow you to interact with your assistant. You use the button as on a walkie-talkie, pressing to talk to Bixby and releasing when you’ve delivered your command… but it's a bit slow to catch up.

Bixby can be too literal – wanting to set a timer preset rather than just starting a countdown for example – and while you can ask it to take a picture and send it to a friend the whole process takes around 30 seconds – and that's assuming Bixby can find the friend to start with – in which time you’d rather just do it manually.

The Galaxy S9 also keeps telling us that we can dictate using Bixby, but this was never 100% accurate – it was pretty darn good, considering that you're essentially talking to a baby robot, but we needed to edit our words before sending.

Bixby Vision has come a long way though – and the fact that it's turned off by default is just beautiful. No longer do the little green fireflies automatically dance across your viewfinder when you're trying to take a picture of your car, dog, mother or laundry basket (to show her you've done it all) as the phone tries to work out what's being looked at.

Bixby is becoming more capable, getting closer to the abilities of Siri but not at Google Assistant level yet

However, when you do turn on Vision the features are pretty useful. Bixby is much, much better at being able to work out what it's seeing than what it’s hearing, and can give accurate results on the web for things like comics, lamps and nature scenes.

The translation tool is also very strong – it comes up with some weird answers here and there, but on the whole it's very easy to work out what you're looking at. Samsung is making a big deal about this feature, although in reality it's a bit niche... you'll need to be in a foreign country, with data, and completely unable to work out what you're looking at.

So while it's good that Bixby has been upgraded, to at least bring some sense to having that button on the side of the phone, it's still a novelty rather than a must-have feature.

Mapping the button to Google Assistant is still a far better way to get the most from your phone with your voice (although you’ll need to download a third party app to do it), despite it being more limited in scope... at least it manages the things it can do very well.

Improved biometrics

Intelligent scan is accurate, but not as secure

Far easier to unlock your phone

The new Intelligent Scan cycles between facial recognition and iris scanning.

Anyone who read our Galaxy S8 review last year would have realised quite quickly that the biometric unlocking features of that phone almost made it unusable. The fingerprint scanner was too hard to reach, the iris scanner too unreliable and the facial recognition just too poor.

Samsung needed to do something, and it has, with all three features now working seamlessly and interchangeably.

Intelligent Scan marries the iris scanner and facial recognition to make unlocking your phone with your face a far, far simpler task, and as mentioned the fingerprint scanner is much easier to hit.

The speed of the Intelligent Snan feature is so much better than last year... where the iris scanner and facial recognition on the S8 were between 30% and 50% accurate, the two together on the Galaxy S9 yield success almost every time.

In low light the iris scanner is still a bit slow to react, and not always pleased to let you in (in this case, Apple's Face ID absolutely destroys it for accuracy and ease of use), but it's so simple to just flick your finger to the scanner on the back that we never had an issue.

That's a real benefit over the iPhone X, keeping the fingerprint scanner.

The fingerprint scanner is now below the camera and in a far easier spot to hit.

There are a couple of flaws with the biometric system. First, the 2D scan of the face the S9 makes to recognize you isn't as secure as other methods, like the fingerprint scanner or Apple's Face ID.

That's not a huge problem for us – the fingerprint scanner is a better way of paying for things anyway, and really biometric unlocking is more about convenience than it is security.

We weren't able to dupe the Samsung Galaxy S9 with a picture of our face, so if you lose your phone you can feel secure in the knowledge that the thief isn't getting in, which is what most of us really want.

Second, and more frustratingly, you can’t really unlock the phone when it’s placed on a table – the field of vision for the scanner is limited, so unless you weirdly shove your head over it you won’t get in, whereas Apple’s Face ID offers a much wider viewing angle.

New speakers

AKG tuned sound is loud

A tiny bit lacking in punch, but a big upgrade on the S8

The speakers still fire downward from the bottom of the phone, but also from the earpiece.

The other key feature that Samsung is talking up on the Galaxy S9 is the improved speaker setup. If you're tired of hearing sound shoot out the bottom of your phone, you'll appreciate that the top earpiece is now able to fire out sound towards your face.

These speakers have also been tuned to support Dolby Atmos sound, giving you a sense of space from the audio coming out from your phone.

Given how thin this phone is, the overall volume and quality of sound coming out of it is impressive. If anything the volume can go a little too high, and we found ourselves turning it down on occasion, despite only watching videos on social media.

The quality isn't the best on the market – there's definitely a little more punch and clarity from the iPhone X, where the Galaxy S9 is a little bit muddier – but the idea here isn't to replace a Bluetooth speaker, but rather provide a decent experience when listening to music or podcasts without earphones.

Same design as last year, but stronger

Still an excellent, premium-looking phone

It would be too easy to say the Samsung Galaxy S9 is just a carbon copy of the Galaxy S8... but it's very, very close.

There are a few slight changes that make a big difference though, starting with the materials used to make this phone. The fact it's using Gorilla Glass 5 is a big step forward, as it means the phone is even better able than its predecessor to withstand knocks and drops, removing the need for a case if you're not into encapsulating your new expensive phone.

The aluminum used in the construction of the device is also more robust, so less twisting is possible should you accidentally feel the need to warp your phone.

One thing we noticed during our first few weeks of using the phone was the lack of scuffing – if you're using a modern smartphone without a case these days you'll often find that it soon picks up a few nicks – further evidence of an upgrade on the materials used.

But overall it's a very similar design to last year, and only turning the Galaxy S8 and S9 over to reveal their backs will reveal the main difference: the fingerprint sensor has been moved below the camera, rather than being located to the right of it, in a bid to make it more accessible.

The dimensions of the Galaxy S9 make it easy to access most areas of the screen and fingerprint scanner.

And, thankfully, it is more accessible. Where last year the placement of this sensor nearly ruined the Galaxy S8, the fact that it's now so easy to land a finger on it makes the Galaxy S9, well, as simple to unlock as a phone should be.

Thanks to packing a 5.8-inch screen and very little bezel above and below the display, the Samsung Galaxy S9 is easy to manage one-handed while still offering a lot of screen to look at.

Samsung continues to offer a headphone jack, which will be welcomed by the reams of people who haven't invested in a pair of Bluetooth headphones, or don't want to use a dongle adaptor with their favorite pair of wired cans.

The Galaxy S9 will come in four color variants, although most territories won't get all of them.

It's well placed on the bottom of the phone to the left, and easily lets the phone slip into the pocket with a pair of earbuds connected.

Unfortunately, the Bixby button remains on the left-hand side of the phone, right in the middle.

As you'll see later, Bixby serves a better purpose on this phone, but it's still not enough to warrant a dedicated key – and one that feels like a volume switch when sliding your finger down the side looking for it in the pocket.

We still wish the Bixby button wasn't so easy to hit instead of the volume.

The design is still as attractive as ever, the glass shimmering nicely, the buttons offering a perfect travel and the balance in the hand feeling like just the right mix of strength and a lighter weight.

The only thing we can really criticize (apart from the Bixby button's presence) is that it really sucks up fingerprints. The back of your phone will be a smudgy mess in no time – but that’s a natural result of it being made out of glass, and a quick wipe will restore its looks.

Screen

Same technology and resolution as last year

Maximum brightness is boosted

The Galaxy S9 screen is clear and bright.

The Samsung Galaxy S9 screen has already been independently judged to the very best on the market, bringing with it the best in color reproduction, brightness, accuracy and overall sharpness.

It's also been dubbed, by DisplayMate, which conducted the tests, as the least reflective display on the market, meaning you'll be able to see more of the on-screen action when you're in bright sunlight, or in a room with a strong light behind you.

But those are official findings made in lab conditions – the bigger question is whether the 5.8-inch display Samsung has slapped on the Galaxy S9 is actually any good in real-life testing.

The good news for those looking to buy this phone is yes, the screen offers phenomenal quality. The color reproduction, the brightness, the clarity of the screen are all faultless in our eyes, and actually Samsung has managed to make the Super AMOLED technology used for the display deliver images that are more true to life than ever.

Previous Samsung phones have been overly colorful when it comes to color rendition, being known for images that have an almost cartoon-like character, but if anything we'd like a dash more color from the Galaxy S9.

You can really crank up the brightness on this phone too.

You can get this by heading into the settings and choosing a different color mode, and if you're willing to tweak some settings, you can alter the color and white balance of the screen yourself.

It's a world away from what Apple does with its screens, not allowing the slightest alteration, but Samsung wants to make sure that, if you're willing, you can get your perfect color balance.

However, while the display technology is good, the auto-brightness still has issues – and it feels like we say this far too often about Samsung phones. The device always errs on being too bright, and that's a battery-sucker.

What's interesting on the Galaxy S9 is that phone actually learns your brightness preferences, noting when you boost or dim the screen in certain situations, and mimics those settings for you in similar conditions.

We had to reset this to try and get a more useful brightness level, as we were artificially boosting it to look at certain elements of the display, but it's an advanced move from Samsung, and shows just how much the brand is trying to make its phones more useful without the need for settings tweakery.

Users of recent phones, such as the Google Pixel 2 XL, have reported color shifts when viewing the screen at an angle, and while the Galaxy S9 does have a more blue tinge when moved around, it's far from terrible.

That said, place it next to the iPhone X and you’ll see that Apple has tuned Samsung’s technology to be much better looking from an angle.

The low screen reflectance really does come to the fore in day-to-day use – we found it possible to watch an episode of a Netflix TV series with a bright window behind us. It wasn't the most pleasant experience, as the reflections were visible, but given it wasn't that long ago that we weren't able to use our smartphones in the sunlight, we've come an incredibly long way.

The contrast ratios with Super AMOLED are superb.

The Samsung Galaxy S9 has also been certified for use with Mobile HDR Premium content – there's not a lot of that around at the moment, but Samsung has been careful to make sure its displays can handle the top standards on the market.

That said, the S9’s display doesn’t support Dolby Vision, the brand’s advanced HDR format, which is a shame given that Dolby's Atmos audio platform is supported on the phone.

The Edge display is back from Samsung, making use of the curved edges rolling into the side of the chassis. Using the Edge screen to set your favorite apps, key contacts or record a section of the screen as a GIF seem like really cool things to be able to do… but in reality, we just forget it’s there.

What’s it like to use?

An incredibly powerful phone

Keyboard needs a lot of work

The Samsung Galaxy S9 isn’t really that different to the S8 in terms of its interface. It’s running Android 8 Oreo out of the box, and it’s also signed up to Google’s Project Treble, meaning we’ll be seeing faster upgrades to the latest versions of Android in the future.

We’d argue that Samsung has one of the best implementations of an Android skin out there, with the settings, the notifications bar and the icon management on the home screen among the easiest to use.

The Galaxy S9 apes the iPhone’s 3D Touch feature on the home screen, allowing you to long-press an app and have a selection of items pop up – be it playlists on Spotify, most-contacted friends on WhatsApp or the option to take a selfie with the camera – and jump straight to the one you want.

Contextual menus are fun when you remember to use them.

Like the Edge screen on the side of the phone, where you can swipe your finger across and get access to quick shortcuts for apps, we just forget to use it so often., and it’s the same with the extra menu for the home screen apps.

One thing we’re still perplexed about: why the Samsung Galaxy S9’s inbuilt keyboard is so bad. It’s not that it’s inaccurate (although it’s a long way from being perfect), but it learns but it learns wrong words, or capitalizes words randomly, then suggesting odd replacements when you correct it.

Again It’s not a massive issue, but given that you need this keyboard to use AR Emoji GIFs properly we’d have expected Samsung to make it bulletproof on what could be one of the top-selling phones of 2018.

According to the marketing materials, the single-sensor 12MP camera on the Samsung Galaxy S9 is the big change that’s going to inspire you to buy this phone.

‘The Camera. Reimagined.’ would be a bold statement from any photography brand, let alone a smartphone maker, and in reality Samsung has been over-dramatic here.

The key upgrade is the fact that the sensor can now switch between an aperture of f/1.5 (for great low-light shots) and f/2.4 (for better brighter scenes), while improving the intelligence of the sensor so that it can analyse and improve your images more effectively.

On top of this, Samsung has refined the photography modes on offer, allowing you to take myriad different styles of shot – and nearly all of them are useful and worth playing with.

Pro mode is the right mix of powerful, yet accessible.

Let’s focus on the auto mode though, as that’s going to be the one that most Galaxy S9 users snap through. It’s excellent as ever, but possibly not that big of an upgrade over the Samsung Galaxy S8.

In bright light, the pictures from the Galaxy S9 are without equal in terms of clarity; there’s a sharpness, brightness and overall quality that still stuns when you learn it’s come from a smartphone camera.

The Galaxy S9 is also adept at shooting in low light, thanks to that lower aperture, which hasn’t been seen on a smartphone before. Yes, the images are a little on the muddy side, but when compared to low-light snaps from other top-end phones (the iPhone X, for instance) the lack of the noise and the higher brightness is amazing.

If we were to be picky, we’d say that some of the images we’ve taken lack a real pop of color – Samsung has seemingly decided that it wants its cameras to produce images that are more natural-looking, but this comes at the expense of vibrancy at times.

We found that just hitting the edit button and selecting the ‘auto’ enhancement created such an improved snap… why not have that all the time, Samsung?

There’s also some definite shutter lag when moving quickly between scenes, as the autofocus and exposure take a moment to recalibrate before being ready to take a picture. On a few occasions we were trying to get a shot simply by taking loads of photos to see if one was in focus, but were delayed by the shutter lag.

A bit of background light can also wash out the picture in auto mode, and even playing around with the pro settings didn’t make things much better – although we do have to doff our cap to the excellent abilities of said expert mode, as it’s not only comprehensive but also very easy to use.

Those points aside, you’ll generally struggle to take a bad photo with the Galaxy S9. The clarity, even when the lens was zoomed, in some of the pictures we took, and the ability of the camera to pick out details in high-contrast scenes are impressive.

The variation of light here is well-presented

We did have to take a shot a couple of times to get the right result on occasion, but we still managed to get a good snap in the end. The Galaxy S9’s ability to handle scenes with strong backlighting is also excellent, with bright sunlight not causing a subject the foreground to become a total silhouette.

The selfie camera, coming in at 8MP, also handles low light well, although it doesn’t have the wider field of view some other smartphones offer, such as many top-end models from LG.

This is compensated for by a panorama mode that allows you to swivel to get more people into the picture… it’s a little tough on the wrists, but it produces some decent effects.

Samsung has also included a portrait mode that blurs the background for your Galaxy S9 selfies. It’s similar to what the TrueDepth camera can do on the iPhone X, and the effect isn’t that different, with some decent background blur, although you can’t take the ‘studio’ shots with the blacked out backing that Apple is shouting about at the moment.

The other new feature is the super-slow-motion camera, which can capture 960 frames per second, turning a 0.2-second instant of movement into a six-second long slow-mo clip.

In bright light, it’s exceptional… as long as you’re either holding the phone steady or are ready on the trigger. You can set the S9 to automatically sense movement, but this only works in bright light with the phone almost motionless; don’t expect this to work well in your hands.

When it does work, it’s amazing, but too often we were stuck trying to find something interesting to shoot in slow-motion.

The other option is to do it manually, which is much easier as the camera is constantly recording and so the action is recorded from the moment you want to start – there seems to be some caching going on so you don’t miss anything.

But don’t think about trying to shoot slow-motion footage in low light – it gets very noisy and low quality, which is understandable given the amount of information that needs to be processed. You can use the flash, but most scenes we wanted to film had a wider frame, and it was hard to illuminate them with a phone’s little LED.

Overall, we had expected a little better from the Galaxy S9’s camera given the loud noises Samsung has been making about its performance, although the low-light capability does border on the astounding at times, and the fact that the camera is so powerful in all conditions means you’ll get some really great snaps.

The color reproduction doesn’t impress us quite as much as something like the Google Pixel 2 did at launch, however, and the iPhone X will sometimes offer a more well-rounded image quality – but overall, the Galaxy S9 has a simply awesome camera for most scenarios.

Battery life is disappointing

Not much change from last year

We’re disappointed with the battery life in the Samsung Galaxy S9, as it’s not made the jump forward we expected.

With the same 3,000mAh power pack on board as the Galaxy S8 and the same amount of pixels to drive, but with a more efficient processor, and with Samsung having had a year to refine the software, we were expecting big things from the Samsung Galaxy S9’s battery.

What we got was something that’s a bit more ‘slippery’ than the Galaxy S8. Where we’d have around eight hours of battery life left when the indicator was showing 60% full, now we’re seeing the same numbers at 70%.

The worry with Android phones is always that there’s a nefarious app playing around in the background, causing more power to be drained than necessary, but our constant checking showed that it was usually just the screen – which is brighter this year – drawing more power.

What’s interesting here is that Samsung has clearly optimized things, as when we ran our standard video test (90 minutes of a Full HD video at maximum brightness) the Galaxy S9 only lost 17% of its battery.

Battery performance was fine, but a bit too much on the 'slippy' side.

That’s not the best we’ve seen on test (for comparison, the iPhone X lost just 10% using the same screen technology as Samsung), but it’s a marked improvement over the 23% the S8 lost last year… and the S9 has a brighter screen.

The overnight test result was pretty standard – the battery lost 5% in an eight-hour period, which is bang-on average for a modern smartphone. Again, however, we’d have hoped for more from one of the top phones of the moment.

Wireless charging is present once again, and Samsung remains one of the only brands to be compatible with both the Qi and PMA standards; in short, your Galaxy S9 will charge on any wireless pad.

While fast charging is enabled via wireless as well, we didn’t note a particularly fast charge without wires – although that could be due to the fact that the Galaxy S9 took so long to ‘settle down’.

We often couldn't see any rogue apps munching loads of battery either.

We’ve been testing phones for a long, long time, and we always make sure to cycle the battery through a few charges before making any assumptions, as often it takes a few days to make sure all apps are optimized and patches downloaded, and for the phone generally just to shake itself out.

This process took a lot longer than expected for the Galaxy S9, and after a week it was only just starting to settle… battery life gradually improved, but we’re still needing to boost the charge at least once to get through to the end of the day.

Perhaps users will find this improves after a few weeks’ use… but based on what we’ve seen, the Galaxy S9 is only just a touch better than the iPhone 8, and weaker than last year’s Galaxy S8.

The Samsung Galaxy S9 is two things: first, it’s a very impressive smartphone, and likely to be one of the best in 2018. Second, it’s a disappointing upgrade over the Samsung Galaxy S8.

The reason it can be both these things at once is that the Galaxy S8 was a brilliant phone, marred only by the biometric issues that made it hard to actually unlock the handset. In solving those issues Samsung has righted a big wrong from 2017, but beyond that there isn't really much that impresses.

And that's important, as the Galaxy S8 is still going to be on sale for a lower price, thus making it a tempting alternative for those thinking of getting the new Samsung phone.

With the Galaxy S9 offering the same design and screen as before, and only a few minor upgrades, Samsung is going to have a tough time convincing people they should go for the improved model.

That said, those upgrades are mostly things that will actually benefit the user. The Galaxy S9 camera is exceptional in low light, which you'd expect given the innovative dual-aperture technology Samsung has used in this phone.

The improved materials used in the construction offer a stronger phone, and while you won't feel that when picking it up, you'll be thankful for it a year or two down the line.

The relocation of the fingerprint scanner, combined with the far-more-accurate Intelligent Scan unlocking system, makes the Galaxy S9 eminently more usable than the Galaxy S8 – if you can't unlock your phone easily, it's pretty useless.

AR Emoji has been given a big marketing push, but it's largely a novelty, and an uninspiring one at that. It needs more weighty hardware and software behind it to work effectively, so if you're enticed to buy the Galaxy S9 by this feature we'd advise against it.

The extra speed on board is nice to see, but it's not really adding anything at this stage – what we did want to see was improved battery life, and we didn't get that.

Should I buy it?

The camera is the big reason to go for the Samsung Galaxy S9, along with the uprated power and improved construction, but it's not a great leap forward. The camera flatters to deceive at times, with the color reproduction the main issue for us.

It's annoying to see that a photo which only looks half-decent when you snap it can be instantly improved simply by adding an effect in post-processing – it's hard to work out why Samsung doesn't just do this automatically.

The extra cost is going to be tough for some people to stomach, as you'll get a lot of the features here on the Galaxy S8, as long as you don't mind some finger gymnastics to get to the fingerprint scanner on the back and aren't bothered about having the best camera Samsung can create.

The Galaxy S9 could still well be the phone of 2018 – but the competition has a real chance to catch up this year.

First reviewed: March 2018

Not convinced this phone is for you? Check out these instead:

iPhone X

Okay, so there aren't a huge number of people who switch between these two big brands’ handsets, but hear us out. The iPhone X is a faster phone with a comparable battery life, and offers the kind of app stability that Android owners still lust after – that's a key thing.

The camera isn't as strong in low light and, like the Galaxy S9, the colors are more natural-looking, rather than punchy; it's also more expensive, and doesn't have a headphone jack. That said, it's the most impressive iPhone we've ever tested, so if you're thinking of making the jump this would be the iPhone to jump to.

Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus

If, however, you're thinking of sticking with the Samsung Galaxy range and want the best out there, then the Galaxy S9 Plus is the way to go. It's a phone that has all the power of the S9, but adds in longer battery life and a better camera thanks to having dual sensors on the rear (which brings better quality photos, in our tests).

It's more expensive, yes, but if you want something that just works well and offers a great screen experience, the S9 Plus could be called the S9 Turbo, such is the upgrade on a couple of the issues that irk us with the S9.

Samsung Galaxy S8

When reviewing a new phone, we're often looking at the cheaper model from the previous year to work out if we'd recommend it over the latest handset – and in this case the Galaxy S8 is going to be the right choice for the many who want a cutting-edge Samsung phone without going to a plus-size model.

The design and screen are pretty similar (the biometric issues mentioned above aside), and the camera isn't that far off in terms of quality. You're basically sacrificing low-light capabilities, AR Emoji and dual speakers for a lower cost – and that will be a worthwhile trade-off for many.

Google Pixel 2

The only reason we've got this phone listed as a competitor to the Galaxy S9 is that it takes some of the best smartphone photos on the market. It doesn't have the best screen technology, spec list or build, but it does offer startlingly good snaps thanks to the clever software Google has developed to analyse and improve your pictures.

It's also starting to drop in price now, and with the latest Android upgrades coming to this phone as soon as they're launched we can see it attracting a decent crowd of smartphone upgraders.

]]>http://www.techradar.com/reviews/samsung-galaxy-s9-reviewRazer Mamba Hyperfluxhttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/techradar/tech-reviews/~3/7O305fNsImg/razer-mamba-hyperflux
http://www.techradar.com/reviews/razer-mamba-hyperfluxRazer’s newest wireless gaming mouse might be battery-free, but it ends up dragged down by its special charging mouse pad.Thu, 15 Mar 2018 20:53:48 +0000techradar.comWirelessly charging mice are officially a trend now that the Razer Mamba Hyperflux is the third such peripheral to promise consistent and constant wireless operation when paired with a special ‘Firefly’ mouse pad.

While it might seem like Razer is late to the game, the Mamba Hyperflux treads new ground by ditching any sort of internal battery in the name of being the world’s lightest wireless gaming mouse. The result is a wireless peripheral that basically can’t be used anywhere but on its mouse pad.

That’s a tall order to ask of gamers, and the $249 (about £180, AU$320) price point of this wireless combo only makes it harder to rationalize as a worthy purchase.

Although theLogitech G903 and its complementing PowerPlay mouse pad are also priced at $249 (£259, AU$449), it’s a far more compelling choice since you can use the mouse wirelessly on its own. Furthermore, spending $169 (£169, AU$299) onCorsair Dark Core RGB SE and its MM1000 Qi mouse pad is a comparative a bargain that also boasts the utilitarian Qi charging system.

Design

Unsurprisingly, the Mamba Hyperflux shares the most of its overall design with Razer’s flagship Mamba – save for a few features.

The most notable difference regarding the Mamba Hyperflux is the lack of RGB strips running along both sides of the device. Good news is it still packs a decent amount of RGB with lighting built into the scroll wheel and the company logo.

The Hyperflux version of the Mamba is also missing the Adjustable Click Force system, which would have allowed us to fine tune the amount of force needed to actuate the two primary buttons. Thankfully, it’s not something you’re really going to miss unless you loved the feature on the original version.

Although minor, it’s hard not to look at all these omissions and not see the Mamba Hyperflux as a cut-down version of the original it was modeled after.

At the very least, we can say the Mamba’s ergonomics haven’t suffered. The mouse’s overall shape is the same as its Hyperflux-less brethren, which should delight right-handed users – and might annoy everyone else.

As with other Razer mice we’ve tested in the past, the tall frame and sloped back side make it incredibly comfortable for both a palm and claw grip. The Hyperflux also features large rubber grips with a long, wavy lined design reminiscent of the company’s more recent peripherals, including the Atheris and Lancehead.

You also won’t find another wireless mouse lighter than this. Weighing in at just 96g, the Mamba Wireless feels light as a feather. Razer was only able to this after dropping the battery that would have otherwise added another 29g.

Of course, dropping this crucial component also means the mouse has to either constantly draw power from its bundled mouse mat or be connected directly into other devices via USB.

Flux capacitor

As mentioned before, the Firefly Hyperflux is the other half of this peripheral’s wireless charging package. This special version of Razer’s RGB mouse pad generates a small, localized magnetic field that the Mamba Hyperflux turns into a constant stream of energy through electromagnetic induction.

Though the Mamba Hyperflux lacks a battery, it’s equipped with a super capacitor – an electrical component that stores and transfers electricity. You might think the peripheral like this would die the instant you lifted it off the pad, but it can actually hold a charge for five to 10 seconds, depending on how extreme your lighting effects are.

Any more time than that, and it'll stop working, but dropping it back onto the charging mat will bring it back to life within a second or two.

With this setup, you’ll still have to route a USB wire from the mouse pad to your PC, but at least you won’t need another port for the transmitter, because it’s actually built into the mouse pad. While this is good for cutting down on clutter and freeing up a USB port, it also means you really can’t use this mouse without the Firefly Hyperflux.

Otherwise, the only other of way using this peripheral is connecting it directly to your PC through a USB connection – but this feels like it ruins the whole point of it being ‘wireless’.

In this way, the Razer Mamba Hyperflux feels like a ‘wireless’ mouse intrinsically tethered to a USB charging pad. That would be fine for users who mean to only use it for gaming at home, but for the amount of money it costs, we would want a peripheral that we can take anywhere.

The Corsair Dark Core RGB SE and Logitech G903, on the other hand, are completely competent wireless mice on their own that are then further complemented by their respective wireless charging mousepads.

Performance

Electromagnetic resonance technology and all its novelty aside, the Mamba Hyperflux is another solid gaming mouse from Razer. At no point did we notice lag or watch our cursors suddenly spin out of control due to a wireless signal malfunction.

Rather, the mouse was accurate to a pin point, thanks to its 16,000 DPI 5G optical sensor. Of course, it helps that Mamba HyperFlux works best on a pad specifically designed for it and PC gaming.

The dual-sided mouse mat gives us a hard, slick surface on one side for rapid movements needed for navigating the wide maps in XCOM. Then, the soft pad comes in handy for games that require more accuracy, like pulling a dozen headshots in Nazi Zombie Army: The Trilogy.

Despite everything Razer had to cut to get the Mamba to its sub-100g weight, we’re somewhat glad it did. Without a wire to add drag, you won’t find another mouse you can sling across the mousepad as quickly as this.

Final verdict

Razer’s Hyperflux peripherals are a novel concept and they achieve everything they set out to do. However, whether these versions of the Mamba and Firefly are for you will depend on your PC gaming setup. If you’re totally cool with buying a wireless mouse and charging pad combo that you’ll never take outside, it might be a worthy venture.

If it were up to us though, we’d rather spend our money on Corsair or Logitech’s more robust wireless solutions. Still, the capabilities of Razer’s wireless charging technology can’t come soon enough to the company’s other peripherals, like the Lancehead, and we hope Razer decides to keep the battery next time.

Microsoft Surface Pro 4: The Essential Review

Our ‘essential review’ of the Surface Pro 4 contains all of the highlights (and lowlights) of Microsoft’s 2015Windows 10tablet. It’s intended as a more digestible summary of our full-length review, in that it shouldn’t take more than half a minute to read.

Our ‘essential review’ of the Surface Pro 4 contains all of the highlights (and lowlights) of Microsoft’s 2015 Windows 10 tablet. It’s intended as a more digestible summary of our full-length review, in that it shouldn’t take more than half a minute to read.

While it isn’t the prettiest Surface Pro on the block anymore, the Surface Pro 4 is still worth a spot in your mind – even if there are rumors that a new foldable tablet version of the Surface might be on the way. When it launched back in October 2015, it was praised as being the natural progression of the Surface Pro bloodline. Almost three years later in 2018, it still holds up remarkably well and, although you won’t find it brand new out of the box these days, a cheaper refurbished model is definitely worth grabbing.

At the time of writing, the new Surface Pro costs noticeably more than a similarly specced Surface Pro 4 that’s been refurbished by the manufacturer, undoubtedly a major selling point for the older of the two. For a 2017 model configured with an Intel Core m3 processor, 4GB of RAM and 128GB of solid-state drive, or SSD, storage, you can expect a price point of $799 (£799, AU$1,199).

The ageing Surface Pro 4, on the other hand, can be had for the same exact price on Amazon in the US and includes a more powerful 6th-generation Intel ‘Skylake’ Core i5, 4GB of memory and a 128GB storage drive. Even better, you can buy the entry-level, Core m3 model certified refurbished for $649 (£579, about AU$812), $150 (£120, about AU$387) less than the Surface Pro 2017 counterpart.

Unlike the Surface Pro 3 before it, the Surface Pro 4 runs Windows 10 rather than Windows 8 by default. That’s a huge benefit considering all that Microsoft’s newest operating system has to offer. Most notably, it’s the last numbered iteration of Windows, so rather than getting extreme feature overhauls every four years or so, it gets them multiple times a year.

The latest of these revamps is known as the Windows 10 Fall Creators Update, which brought to the table additions like Game Mode and OneDrive Files On-Demand. Internally, this was known as ‘Redstone 3’ prior to its official launch back in October 2017. The next in the series, ‘Redstone 4’, will allegedly be called the Spring Creators Update, according to several leaked Insider Preview builds that contain the moniker.

It’s expected that the next version of Windows 10 will introduce developments in artificial intelligence (AI), gaming, HDR video and security to the Surface Pro 4 as well as other devices like it. The latest news is that it’s purportedly coming out in April 2018.

Otherwise, to catch you up with its history, the Surface Pro 4 managed to introduce more levels of pressure sensitivity and a host of buttons to the signature, but sold separately, Surface Pen. Likewise, the Type Cover keyboard is heavier and more satisfying to the touch, while the screen resolution was bumped all the way to 2,736 x 1,824, making it 216 pixels per inch (ppi), as opposed to the 128 ppi display of the 13-inch MacBook Air.

With the Surface Pro 4, Microsoft was more concerned with perfecting an already-successful design rather than making any bombastic innovations. That’s why it basically retains a similar look and feel to that of the Surface Pro 3, albeit with a few minor refinements including a new chrome-laden Microsoft logo and a chassis more than half a millimeter thinner than the previous generation.

Microsoft Surface Pro 4: Who's it for? Should I buy it?

If you can’t stand the massive, unwieldy size and price of the Surface Book 2, the Surface Pro 4 is not only a worthy alternative, but an excellent first choice for creative professionals constantly on the move. It’s cheaper than the new Surface Pro if you buy it refurbished, and it’s nearly as good.

Although there are admittedly shortcomings when it comes to the battery life of the Surface Pro 4, it still holds up as a product that we can safely recommend to Windows tablet newcomers and veterans alike. As a ‘Pro’ device, the Surface Pro 4, of course, ships with Windows 10 Pro pre-installed (a $199/£219/AU$339 value).

That goes without mentioning the Surface Pro 4’s gorgeous screen, which is crystal clear when pitted up against its predecessor. The Type Cover might be sold separately, too, but it’s satisfying to the touch nonetheless. As we glossed over before, the battery life lasting only 3 hours and 15 minutes in the PCMark 8 test is pretty unacceptable for a tablet, but the zippy internal components more than make up for the frequent need to charge.

Having come a long way since its reveal two years ago, the Surface Pro 4 has seen considerable improvement in that time.

The aforementioned Windows 10 Fall Creators Update, for example, is now available to download and install. Aside from our previous utterances, it comes with a helping of new features you’ll grow to love and appreciate such as the Apple AirDrop-inspired Near Share and ‘Find My Pen’ for clumsier artists.

As we continue to await a multitude of changes yet to come, including a potential Surface Pro 5 redesign in the coming months, there is still some work to be done to appease the current Surface Pro 4 install base.

That said, the Surface Pro 4 is markedly cheaper and better than its newly teased ARM-based rivals. Seeing as the HP Envy x2 is now up for pre-order, you may have anticipated a lower starting price than that of Microsoft’s tablets due to its use of the Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 processor found in a lot of Android phones these days.

Unfortunately, that’s not the case. For the time being, you’re better off waiting for the Asus NovaGo if LTE functionality is what you’re after. Meanwhile, the Surface Pro 4 is only $50 more and features twice the storage and more powerful specs.

Design and display

Just like last time, the same all-magnesium, uni-body casing is still here, though the 'Surface' logo has been replaced with Microsoft's new logo in chrome.

Microsoft managed to up the device's screen size by a few hairs, from a straight 12 inches to this year's 12.3 inches, without affecting its footprint at all. In fact, the firm shaved more than half a millimeter off of its thickness, from 9.1mm to 8.4mm – all while fitting full-fat mobile processors.

As for how this was done, the capacitive Windows button said goodbye, thus the extra room for that three tenths of an inch in the display.

Then, Microsoft brought the screen's optical stack – the series of sensors, diodes and pixels beneath the glass – even closer to the glass now, a key point of Microsoft's trademarked PixelSense screen technology.

The display is thus incredibly responsive to touch, and the further sensitivity it brings to the stylus experience is huge. In tandem with the improved Surface Pen, the screen detects 1,024 levels of pressure, even during a single stroke.

Now, let's talk resolution. Even though it didn't have to, Microsoft increased the Surface Pro 4's resolution from 2,160 x 1,440 (216 ppi, or pixels per inch) to 2,736 x 1,824. That makes for a huge 267 ppi for the Surface Pro 4, which blows a key rival, the MacBook Air (128 ppi for the 13-inch), out of the water and just barely beating out out Apple's 12.9-inch iPad Pro at 264 ppi.

More importantly, the new screen proves to be way more luminous and more color accurate than the Surface Pro 3 display at all brightness levels. This is obviously going to be a pretty big deal for any designers or artists that are looking to upgrade from the Wacom tablet and calibrated monitor combo.

For the rest of us, this means more realistic-looking movies and more vibrant photos and games. That's despite even thicker black bars sandwiching your favorite films in 16:9 – and even more so for those in 21:9, or widescreen format, thanks to the 3:2 aspect ratio that remains from last generation.

It's a fair concern for folks that watch plenty of movies and TV on a tablet. But fear not, workers, for you're the very reason Microsoft made this decision. The 3:2 aspect ratio is a middle ground between 16:9 and 4:3 that is ideal for both photo and design or drafting work, wherein 3:2 is much more common, as well as getting computational work done, given the extra vertical space.

Surface Pen and Type Cover

In addition to the aforementioned 1,024 levels of pressure sensitivity, the new-and-included Surface Pen is redesigned to feel more like a pencil. The stylus now has one flat side, as if a Number 2 pencil had all but two of its angles rounded off.

This version is even more comfortable to hold than the last as a result – your index finger rests just above the main function button on the flat end. Secondly, the left side of the frame is coated with thin, powerful strip magnets that allow it to cling onto the tablet's left side. The age of stylus loops is over.

The Pen also sports a new, functional eraser button up top that does what it says on the tin, but has three more functions. In addition to opening OneNote with a single press, the button now takes a screenshot and then opens OneNote with a double press. Finally, a long press summons Cortana to help you out.

Microsoft seems to have expertly weighted the Surface Pen to make it feel not much heavier than your average clickable pen, despite all of the tech inside. Plus, now Microsoft offers additional pen tips right out of the box.

Coupled with Microsoft's PixelSense display, the duo makes for the best stylus experience we've had on a tablet yet for as little as we're wont to use it. While we're neither artists nor designers, the screen's superb palm detection and the accuracy and nuance of the Pen tracking give us confidence that the Surface Pro 4 is Microsoft's best shot at luring in that crowd yet.

These improvements pale in comparison with Microsoft's new-and-still-not-included Type Cover. This time around, Microsoft took a chiclet-style approach. This makes keeping track of which keys your fingers are on by feel much easier, and it allows for each key to be individually back lit.

The new Type Cover is also thicker and far more rigid than before, allowing for deeper key travel and punchier feedback – not to mention a sturdier, quieter surface to type on – that brings it so much closer to a true laptop keyboard. Microsoft also widened the touchpad and coated it in glass rather than plastic.

Finally, Microsoft has a version of the Type Cover with a biometric Fingerprint ID for $159 (£149, AU$249). The new keyboard cover is only available in black and uses Windows Hello to login to the Surface with a fingertip press. The scanner can also authorise app purchases from the Windows Store, and because the keyboard is backwards compatible, it can be used with the Surface Pro 3 too.

Performance

Every performance score here, save for PCMark 8 Home, shows a minor increase from the first unit I tested. It's a good sign that the Surface Pro 4 was already operating at its peak, and that only the battery needed fixing.

The Surface Pro 4 bested the 2015 HP Spectre x360 in almost every test by roughly 25%. As for the 13-inch MacBook Air, its multi-core Geekbench 3 (which tests CPUs primarily) score is plenty short of what the Surface achieved.

Ultimately, don't expect to see a major difference between how any of these three machines perform day-to-day, though the MacBook Air will last way longer on a charge. If anything, you might get slightly better frame rates out of games played on the Surface Pro 4 than that 2015 Spectre x360.

If you're curious, the Pro 4 runs Hearthstone (our go-to tablet testing game) without a hitch on its highest settings, even at an automatically-adapted resolution. Plus, the color-calibrated display makes every element on the game's interactive play boards that much more distracting.

Battery life

Tested on pre-production hardware that we were promised has been scrubbed of its battery woes, the Surface Pro 4 produced far better battery life results than at the onset. Unfortunately, they're still well below not only Microsoft's own claims, but what choice rivals are able to put up.

While arguably the most harsh battery test in our lineup, PCMark 8 Home Battery saw the Pro 4 last 3 hours and 15 minutes, a marked 50% increase from before. Still, the Spectre x360 held out in that test for 4 hours and 38 minutes.

Microsoft's tablet fared much better on our video playback test, lasting 5 hours and 15 minutes. That's enough to last you on most coast-to-coast US flights.

In a similar test, the MacBook Air was able to stream 1080p video over Wi-Fi for a whopping 13 hours and 24 minutes. Though, that's thanks to a far lower-resolution display and likely a larger battery.

Regardless, Microsoft promises up to 9 hours of video playback, and these numbers aren't close. Sure, these figures are far better than last year's Surface Pro 3, despite the serious screen resolution bump, which should not be overlooked. But, they still can't hold a candle to neither Apple's leading laptop nor its top tablet – much less comparable Windows hybrids.

Longevity is then about the only thing holding the Surface Pro 4 back from truly, honestly replacing your laptop – or at least your MacBook Air specifically. Otherwise, the machine offers somewhat below-average lasting power.

Not convinced? Try these:

Samsung Galaxy Book: With an incredible display, long battery life and all of the essential accessories in the box, this tablet all but requires you to make liberal use of Samsung’s phone-exclusive syncing and biometric login features via Samsung Flow, its key selling points. Just mind the lack of Windows Hello.

Lenovo Miix 510: A great price, USB-C and USB 3.0, and an included keyboard cover make the Miix 510 an appealing option. While there are a couple of reasons (battery, screen) why you’d go for the Surface Pro 4 instead, but the Miix 510 offers an awful lot for the price. But, again, what's counting against it is considerable.

HP Spectre x2: Its unique kickstand, even sharper IPS screen and hardier included keyboard cover help the Spectre x2 stand out. You'll stay for the impressive spec sheet and premium. That said, it's too bad that the stylus doesn't come included with this device, unlike its rivals. This is likely the biggest rival to the Surface line today.

First reviewed: October 2015

Kane Fulton and Gabe Carey have also contributed to this review

]]>http://www.techradar.com/reviews/pc-mac/tablets/microsoft-surface-pro-4-1290285/reviewAlcatel A7http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/techradar/tech-reviews/~3/iUtIRKDBCYE/alcatel-a7-review
http://www.techradar.com/reviews/alcatel-a7-reviewThe A7 doesn't dazzle, but it offers near-stock Android, a good screen, excellent battery, reliable performance and a no-frills camera.Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:52:47 +0000techradar.comThe Alcatel A7 is the latest mid-range challenger from TCL Communication Technology, the company which manufactures phones under the French brand Alcatel.

Powered by an entry-level MediaTek MT6750T chipset, it has a 5.5-inch LCD screen, 32GB of storage, 3GB of RAM and a massive 4000mAh battery, which also supports fast charging.

It is accompanied to market by the A7 XL, which has a 6-inch screen, metal bodywork and predictably costs a little more to buy.

Alcatel A7 price and availability

Alcatel A7 price: £189.99 (11,000 Rupees) SIM free

Alcatel A7 release date: September 2017

The Alcatel A7 price can be found as low as £189.99 SIM-free in the UK if you're willing to shop around.

It's available from a number of UK retailers including Amazon, Argos, Very and Littlewoods.

In India the Alcatel A7 will set you back around 11,000 Rupees from Amazon.

Design and Display

5.5-inch LCD screen with 1080 x 1920 resolution

Removable cover gives access to SIM and MicroSD slots

Micro USB port rather than USB Type-C

The Alcatel A7 is something of a rarity these days – even in the mid-range Android sector – because it doesn't have a metal body, and the plastic back actually detaches so you can insert your nano SIM and MicroSD card (the battery, sadly, is not replaceable).

The lack of metal means this is a lightweight phone, despite the 5.5-inch screen. The rear has a grippy spiral texture which prevents the handset from being too slippy during use and showcases a gold Alcatel logo, situated just below the camera and (surprisingly fast) fingerprint scanner.

These two elements are both ringed with a gold accent, which gives the phone a classy look.

Flip the Alcatel A7 over, and you're presented with a device that looks a little outdated; there's no 18:9 aspect ratio screen here and the bezels are huge.

This wouldn't be so bad if the bezels had a purpose, and given that there's a gold-accented speaker grille both above and below the screen, you'd be forgiven for assuming they housed stereo speakers.

Sadly, this isn't the case; only the bottom grille has a speaker - the top one merely contains the in-call speaker, so you're not getting stereo sound during media and music playback.

On the plus side, Alcatel has included an front-facing LED flash on the top bezel, which we'll discuss later in the review. There's also a notification LED, which is a neat extra that some mid-level smartphones lack.

Regarding buttons and inputs, the power and volume controls are found on the right-hand edge of the phone.

The top edge is home to the 3.5mm headphone jack, while the bottom has the Micro-USB port – there's no USB Type-C here, unfortunately, so you'll still need to remember which way round the charger plugs in, which is a distinctly first world problem.

Alcatel A7 hands on gallery

On the bottom-right corner of the Alcatel A7, there's a small indent into which you can slot your nail and pop the back of the phone off. You'll need to do this to insert your Nano SIM or use a MicroSD card to expand the phone's 32GB of default storage.

All in all, the Alcatel A7 is a reasonably inoffensive smartphone from a purely cosmetic perspective; the plastic feels a bit naff in 2018 – even on a mid-range device – and it's a shame that the removable back doesn't also mean a removable battery.

The 5.5-inch LTPS IPS LCD screen is covered in Dragontrail glass (a rival to the more famous Corning Gorilla Glass) and boasts a resolution of 1080 x 1920 pixels, which makes it pretty sharp – you won't witness any blocky images or jagged text here.

Viewing angles are also good, with the image remaining clear no matter which direction you look at it from.

The phone's auto-brightness option does a good job of selecting the right level of light indoors, but the screen is hard to make out when used in direct sunlight; colours also look rather pale and muted when compared to the best OLED panels on the market.

Still, considering the price this is an excellent display – it's sharp and has good contrast levels.

Battery life

4,000mAh battery with fast charging

Easily lasts a whole day on a single charge

With its 4,000mAh battery, the Alcatel A7 offers a surprising amount of stamina for a device in this price bracket.

How much usage you'll get off a single charge obviously depends on your own smartphone habits, but after a day of browsing the web, taking photos, playing games and watching movies, we found the A7 still had plenty of juice left in the tank; in fact, we were able to get through roughly half of the following day, too.

If you're sick of your smartphone running out of power before you even get home, then you'll have no complaints with this device.

In our battery test - where an HD clip is played for 90 minutes at full screen brightness – the Alcatel A7 shed 12 percent of its battery life.

Despite not having a Snapdragon chipset – and thereby missing out on Qualcomm's Quick Charge standard – the A7 does feature fast charging support.

From an empty battery it took around an hour and forty-five minutes to reach the full charge, but if you're looking for a quick top-up before you leave the house, then 15 to 30 minutes connected to the wall charger should do the trick.

Despite the presence of a removable back cover, the Alcatel A7's battery cannot be replaced by the end user – which is something of a missed opportunity, if you ask us.

With people holding onto their handsets for longer these days, the ability to fit a new power cell would have made the phone even more appealing to mid-range buyers.

Camera

16-megapixel rear-facing camera with 1080p video

8-megapixel front-facing selfie cam with LED flash

The Alcatel A7 comes equipped with a 16MP rear camera with a wide f/2.0 aperture.

Electronic Image Stabilization is also featured – the superior Optical Image Stabilization is perhaps a little out of this price range – and the Phase Detect Auto Focus system is reasonably nippy.

A dual-tone LED flash lights up darker shots. For selfies, the 8MP front-facing camera works well enough, although skin tones look a little bleached out, especially when the front-facing LED flash is deployed.

Still, this feature does at least make taking selfies in darkened rooms possible, if you absolutely have to have that kind of thing.

The rear-facing camera supports HD recording at 1080p, 30fps – despite 4K making its way onto other budget-level blowers like the Xiaomi Redmi 5, it's not present here.

Both photo and video quality are average rather than stunning; there's a lot of compression present on still images, and we've seen better HD footage. Low-light shooting is also somewhat lackluster.

The phone's camera software is pretty basic, but does come with some nice extras, such as a panoramic mode, time-lapse recording and the ability to create collages as you take the photos.

The only genuine annoyance is that HDR has to be manually toggled on and off, and isn't deployed automatically, as is the case on many other phones.

In summary, the camera on the A7 isn't going to scoop any awards, but it will be entirely adequate for most users. It's fast to capture and the resultant images look fine on your phone's screen, provided you don't scrutinize them too carefully.

Camera samples

Interface and Software

Android 7 isn't the latest software

With Android 7.0 calling the shots, the Alcatel A7 isn't as cutting edge as it could be – Android 8 Oreo is the latest and greatest version of Google's mobile OS, but only a handful of phones currently have it, and most of those are found at the top section of the market.

Alcatel has kept things relatively clean when it comes to UI design, choosing to maintain the core look of "stock" Android Nougat while making tiny adjustments and embellishments which aim to improve the overall user experience.

Some of these hit the mark, such as the lock-screen wallpaper randomizer which mixes static and live images to good effect, even allowing you to pick out your favorites or hide ones you don't like.

The ability to select different themes is also welcome, even if it's less unique these days than it once was.

Unfortunately, there are a few bum notes as far as apps are concerned; Alcatel has included a bespoke Music player which based on the design of Google Music, but doesn't connect to tunes stored in Google's cloud – instead, it links to Deezer.

If you already use Deezer then you're better off downloading the official Android app; for everyone else, Google Play Music – which is ironically installed right out of the box – is a far superior option.

There's more needless replication of functionality with the web browser, gallery app and curated app store, all of which are best being disabled as soon as you get the phone so you can use Google's far better alternatives. SwiftKey is the default keyboard, but we quickly found ourselves swapping this out for Google Keyboard.

There's nothing inherently wrong with OEMs like Alcatel filling their phones with bespoke apps, but we'd much rather they just use Google's offerings instead (the A7 does, to its credit, come preloaded with Chrome, Gmail, Drive, Google Maps and Google Music all pre-installed, it should be noted).

Beyond these minor tweaks, Alcatel has been remarkably restrained when it comes to the UI on the A7. Unlike manufacturers like Xiaomi or Samsung, it offers a pretty vanilla Android experience which is sure to appeal to Google purists, even if the small amount of bloatware is mildly irritating.

Movies, music and gaming

The Alcatel A7's 16:9 ratio screen means that it's not quite as well-suited for movie consumption as devices like the Galaxy S8 or Xiaomi Redmi 5, but there's still enough display real estate on offer to make portable watching enjoyable.

It's just a shame that there's only a single front-facing speaker instead of two; stereo sound would have enhanced the experience. The mono speaker is also somewhat timid and lacking in bass; it also distorts a little at high volume.

At least music lovers can take solace in the fact that the phone has a 3.5mm headphone jack.

Given its entry-level specs, we weren't expecting much from the Alcatel A7 when it came to gaming, but we came away surprised.

Real Racing 3 is a good benchmark for 3D performance, despite being a few years old now, and the A7 handled it well – there was still some slowdown when a lot of cars were on-screen at once, but generally, it offered a smooth and fast experience.

Tekken – which only launched very recently and is one of the most graphically stunning fighters available on Android – also runs well.

Specs and performance

Like a great many mid-level Android handsets, the Alcatel A7 sports a MediaTek chipset – the octa-core MT6750T, to be precise.

There's 3GB RAM to keep things ticking over, which is pretty much standard on a handset in this price range these days.

Running AnTuTu Benchmark yields a score of 55610, which is pretty lackluster by modern standards.

Geekbench gives a single-core score of 613 and a multi-core score of 2607. Again, this is hardly groundbreaking when compared to other 2018 Android phones.

Roughly speaking, the A7 is on par with handsets running the Qualcomm Snapdragon 810 chipset, which was considered to be cutting-edge around three years ago.

It's obvious that the Alcatel A7 isn't going to challenge the big boys of the smartphone arena, and despite the disappointing benchmarks the phone ran well enough during our review period.

Granted, it began to struggle when multiple activities were taking place at once – such as downloads and video running simultaneously – but for casual users, the lack of horsepower is going to be less of an issue.

Verdict

The Alcatel A7 is your typical mid-range Android smartphone; it offers a neat design, good screen, middle-of-the-road performance and a workmanlike camera.

It's not really lacking in any category, but predictably doesn't quite reach the lofty heights of a device which would cost you three or even four times as much.

The all-plastic design feels a little tacky in 2018, and the LCD screen doesn't pop like the OLED panels we're seeing on more and more handsets these days.

Performance wise, it's about on par with flagships from 2015, while the camera is reasonably straightforward and lacks special tricks like bokeh modes or dual-sensor shenanigans.

Despite its unremarkable nature, the A7 performs well enough, and the uncluttered UI will appeal to those who are put off by aggressive OEM skins.

Who's this for?

It may not turn heads, but the Alcatel A7 is the perfect device for casual smartphone users who don't want to have to sell a kidney or tie themselves into an expensive contract to get a decent handset.

As long as you don't demand too much of it, you're unlikely to be disappointed.

Should you buy it?

If you're shopping on a budget and don't like the look of other low-cost Android smartphones out there, then the Alcatel A7 is a worthy choice.

For £200 you're getting a lot of phone for your money; the A7 does everything to an acceptable standard without too many sacrifices, but if you're willing to invest a little more moolah then you might be better off looking at handsets like the OnePlus 5T, which offers flagship specs without hitting the insane price tags seen on the iPhone X and Galaxy S9.

If the Alcatel A7 hasn't quite taken your fancy, but its price tag is in your ball park, take a look at these alternatives.

Honor 9 Lite

The Honor 9 Lite has a lovely 18:9 display and more premium feel than the Alcatel A7, but its custom EMUI is a little overbearing and its camera has similar problems with low-light shooting.

]]>http://www.techradar.com/reviews/alcatel-a7-reviewMoto G5S Plushttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/techradar/tech-reviews/~3/cWXNAJQF5ck/moto-g5s-plus
http://www.techradar.com/reviews/moto-g5s-plusThe Moto G5S Plus has a bigger screen and a better build than its predecessor, but is it the complete package?Thu, 15 Mar 2018 11:44:17 +0000techradar.comThe Moto G5S Plus is the quick-fire successor to the Moto G5 Plus, arriving less than six months after the G5.

It's not overly clear why Lenovo (the firm that now owns the Moto handset business) opted for such a quick replacement, but it's not uncommon in today's mobile market - just look at OnePlus and Sony.

Editor's note:While the Moto G5S Plus is still widely available, Motorola itself is no longer selling it on its own website. What does this mean? Well, with none of the firm's G series available from its own site, and with a heavy tease made at MWC 2018, we are expecting its successor - the Moto G6 Plus (and Moto G6) to arrive very soon.

If you're considering buying the Moto G5S Plus you may want to hold on a few more weeks to see if Motorola launches an updated version of its hugely popular mobile line. If you simply can't wait, the G5S Plus is still a great buy.

The Moto G5S Plus offers up a slightly slicker design, larger screen and dual cameras over the phone it replaces.

It's another solid hit for the series, though, with potentially-fixable camera lag the only major black mark on what is otherwise a great value, high-quality phone.

Moto G5S Plus price and availability

Moto G5S Plus release date: August 2017

Moto G5S Plus launch price: £259 ($279.99, around AU$350)

The Moto G5S Plus price at launch was £259 ($279.99, around AU$350), but since its arrival in the middle of 2017 the price has dropped to around £220 SIM free in the UK.

While it is still widely available from carriers and retailers, the G5S Plus is no-longer available on the Motorola UK and Australia websites, suggesting the Moto G6 Plus could well be imminent.

Mid-range specs at an affordable price

High-quality metal build

A 5.5-inch screen

The Moto G series has become a smartphone institution to rival Samsung's S series. We've been recommending these phones to buyers on a budget since the first Moto G appeared in 2013.

These phones used to be made by Motorola, now Lenovo. And while a few design priorities have changed in the handover, the core philosophy remains: these are handsets made for people who don't want to spend an obscene amount on a phone.

The Plus models, including the Moto G5S Plus, are for people out for a little more; a larger screen, perhaps more memory and a bit more power.

Not much time has passed since its predecessor the G5 Plus arrived, making us wonder, what's different?

At first glance, you'd assume the biggest change is the new dual rear camera setup. But it’s not. Two other elements are more important.

Lenovo has significantly improved the build of the Moto G5S Plus, using a full metal jacket rather than a plastic one with a thin sheet of aluminum on the back. This is a top-grade build, not a penny-saving kludge.

The screen is also larger, a 5.5-inch display rather than the 5.2-incher of the G5 Plus. This is a return to the roots of the Plus line, making it seem a phone geared at enthusiasts.

In some ways, it's a much truer sequel to the Moto G4 Plus than the Moto G5 Plus ever was. It also has NFC, missing from the Moto G5.

This is a very nice phone.

There's not a great deal of progress in terms of camera quality, processor power or display technology.

However, they arguably are not needed, as the Moto G5S Plus already gets close to the experience of using a £500/$600/AU$700-plus phone for half the price.

Design

Significantly improved all-metal shell

Front fingerprint scanner

Last time around, Lenovo tried to trick us a bit with the Moto G5 and G5 Plus. They were metal phones, but only just. A significant part of the frame was plastic, particularly on the smaller Moto G5.

Lenovo has fixed this in the Moto G5S Plus. Every part of the shell apart from the antenna lines on the back and the glass covering the display and camera is aluminum. There’s no sneaky plastic anywhere.

The build is a full league above that of the previous phones and this is comfortably the best-looking Moto G phone to date, much as we have a serious soft spot for the original all-black Moto G. It feels great too.

We switched to using the Moto G5S Plus from the HTC U11. That phone is three times the price but the transition didn’t seem a huge drop down in terms of pure feel.

There are some neat extras too. The Moto G5S Plus has a reasonably fast fingerprint scanner in the bezel below the screen, and a microSD slot in the SIM tray to let you add to the 32GB of storage.

Its scanner can also be used to replace the on-screen soft keys. A left swipe is 'back', a right one brings up recent apps. This is just an option, you can turn it off.

Like its predecessors, the Moto G5S Plus has a micro USB socket rather than a USB-C one, a move that seems a little out of date and will be positively archaic by the time the phone slips off shelves.

However, USB-C alone doesn’t necessarily provide faster charging or data transfer, only compliance with a higher USB spec does. The two are different.

The Moto G5S Plus has its own fast charging anyway. There's no full IP67/68 waterproofing, which lets a phone withstand being dunked in water, but it does have a water repelling nano coating to stop splashes shorting out the battery or killing the headphone jack.

As with other parts of the phone, you don’t get everything, but you get enough.

Screen

Large and sharp 5.5-inch 1080p screen

Customizable color profile

Like the last few generations of Moto G, the Moto G5S Plus has a 1080p screen rather than an ultra-high resolution one. However, in person it’s sharp despite the large 5.5-inch size.

Color is very good too, although the IPS LCD panel isn't able to deliver the sort of super-saturated tones you'll see in an OLED phone. It’s no great loss if you prefer accurate color, and there are two modes to let you tweak the tone.

The Moto G5S Plus's default Vibrant mode is the standard poppy look of a higher-quality phone screen, while 'standard' brings the tone closer to sRGB, the traditional palette for monitors. To our eyes it still appears very well-saturated, not the slightly low-energy look you get with a very strict sRGB mode.

Even viewing angles are great, with relatively little loss of brightness at an angle.

Unlike a lot of pricier phones, there's no major curvature to the screen, although the last millimeter or two does have a softened '2.5D' style edge. A fully curved look wouldn't really fit with the design anyway, which leaves the real curves to the aluminum.

Interface and reliability

Android Nougat software

Good performance bar the odd crash

Like other Moto phones, the Moto G5S Plus uses a virtually untouched version of Android rather than a custom interface. It currently runs Android 7.1.1.

However, it uses the software style seen in Pixel phones rather than the long-standing default Android UI. The big difference, other than a slightly different look, is that you flick up on the screen to bring up the apps menu rather than just tapping an icon in the dock.

A row of your five most-used apps also stick at the top of the apps menu for convenience.

Lenovo’s Moto G5S Plus customizations are low-key. Moto Display flashes up notifications intermittently while the phone is in standby and there are added gestures.

As well as being able to use the fingerprint scanner to replace the soft keys, with swipes acting as ‘back’ and ‘recent apps’, you can karate chop the phone twice to turn the torch on or quickly twist the G5S Plus twice to quick-capture a photo.

There are also gestures for rejecting calls and silencing the phone. All of these can be turned on/off separately if you find yourself accidentally firing them off, although we’ve grown quite fond of the torch gesture. Anyone else keep losing things under the sofa?

The Moto G5S Plus feels fast, with only a slight loss of the immediacy with which apps load compared to a phone 2-3 times the price.

We did experience a few app crashes, of the Facebook and camera apps in particular. However, if this is the phone’s fault such bugs are likely to be ironed out fairly quickly.

Similarly, bringing the phone out of standby using the fingerprint scanner is slower than most, although it reacts quickly while the screen is on.

Android 8 Oreo is set to come to the Moto G5S Plus at some point in the future, but Lenovo has yet to reveal an exact date so you shouldn't expect to get the up to date software particularly quickly if you buy this phone.

Movies, music and gaming

Large screen is perfect for media

Solid speaker

No extra media software

The Moto G5S Plus’s screen makes it one of the best budget candidates for gamers and mobile media fans. Lenovo has not added any apps for this, though, leaving Google’s apps suite to the task.

However, when you first boot-up the phone you’re given the option to install from a selection of popular apps, including favorites like Netflix.

Google’s Music and Movies apps are perfectly fine if you don’t know where to start. They let you play your own content as well as streaming from Google’s own library.

Movies come in the form of outright purchases or rentals, but the music side is a little closer to Spotify, letting you stream 40 million tracks for a $9.99/£9.99/AU$11.99 a month subscription. You can buy albums too.

For the old-schoolers out there, the Moto G5S Plus also has an FM radio. We can’t imagine many people will use it at this point, though.

Given this is a relatively low-cost phone, we’re very happy with the sound quality of the bottom-loaded mono speaker. It’s loud and has the extra shot of lower-frequency power needed in a tiny speaker to avoid sounding reedy and harsh.

We’re also relieved that Lenovo has kept the 3.5mm headphone jack, whose days in phones are numbered. According to some, anyway.

Gaming performance is great for a lower-cost phone, with only minor occasional frame rate hitches in high-end games like Asphalt 8. If you’re a gamer on a budget, the Moto G5S Plus should be near the top of your list.

True obsessives may also want to consider the Honor 9, another high-quality phone, although at £380 (around $485/AU$640) it’s not really in the same category.

Performance and benchmarks

Mid-grade performance

Snapdragon 625 with 3GB of RAM

Like its predecessor, the Moto G5S Plus has a Snapdragon 625 CPU. This is a mid-range chipset, and one of the best options for a lower-price 1080p phone.

It has eight Cortex-A53 cores, and is paired with 3GB of LPDDR3 RAM rather than the faster LPDDR4/LPDDR4X kind. This is typical for a more affordable phone.

In Geekbench 4 the Moto G5S Plus scores 4,312 points. This is, confusingly, much better than the 3,824 points the Moto G5 Plus scored, despite having the same core hardware. However, it’s within the normal bounds for phones with the Snapdragon 625 chip.

A Snapdragon 625 chipset is nothing to get too excited about at this point, but it’s the right pairing for this phone. And doesn’t struggle with games as some MediaTek chipsets at this level do.

Battery life

3,000mAh battery charges fast

Easily lasts over a day

The Moto G5S Plus has a 3,000mAh battery, one you don’t have any access to. This is a head-scratching spec when the smaller Moto G5S has the same capacity cell.

However, in real use we’re perfectly happy with the phone’s stamina. One day, for example, we streamed a couple of hours of podcasts, took it out for a day in London shooting some photos and still ended up with almost 40% charge by bed time.

A 90-minute video played at maximum brightness takes 16% off the battery level. That’s more than the 12% of the Moto G5 Plus, but that’s no great surprise when this phone has a larger screen.

The Moto G5S Plus also has fast charging, using Lenovo’s TurboPower technology. It ramps-up the voltage to up to 12V, to get you six hours’ use in 15 minutes.

As ever, the fastest charging happens when replenishing the first 60% of the battery, but it’s quick after that too. You’ll see the percentage creep up by just over a point each minute until the very end.

Camera

Good mid-tone dynamic range enhancement

Passable night photos

Disappointing shutter lag

The Moto G5S Plus is the first of the Moto G phones to have two cameras on the back. Phones like the Samsung Galaxy Note 8 and iPhone 7 Plus have a second camera to let you zoom in with less quality loss than normal digital zoom. However, this dual 13MP array is more conventional.

You can simply take depth of field photos with the Moto G5S Plus. This is where the background is blurred for an arty effect, emulating the look of a wide-aperture DSLR lens.

It’s not as good as the Huawei or Apple versions of this idea, though. It can’t deal with complicated subjects well and there’s often ‘outlining’ of even simple ones. However, it’s still worth using and can produce some good results. Some of our best photos were taken using it.

The one problem with the Lenovo Moto G5S Plus camera is that it suffers from significant shutter lag. We used the phone alongside the Moto G4, and it is much faster to shoot than this new phone. We’re talking around a 0.5 second lag per photo, even after focus has been achieved.

That’s bad. However, it’s so uncharacteristic for the series we’re almost convinced Lenovo will fix it with a software update.

This aside, the Moto G5S Plus has a very satisfying camera for a lower-mid-range phone. You’ll get more detail out of the Sony Xperia XA1 though and you need to be careful about the exposure level to get a good shot.

However, dynamic range enhancement is excellent among its peers and color is great. You can even shoot directly into the sun and get a usable pic with the Auto HDR mode.

Contrast isn’t as good as a true high-end phone camera and night photo quality is just okay. Low-light shots are softer here than a good phone with optical image stabilization, so you lose detail, and there’s a little noise. Images are still usable, though.

There’s also a pro mode that lets you alter the main settings yourself, although as usual for a Moto even the basic mode lets you change the exposure. And you’ll need to at times to get the best picture. Metering isn’t quite as smart as the best top-price phones.

The Moto G5S Plus does let you shoot 4K video, though, at 30fps. Move down to 1080p and you can shoot at 60fps.

Around the front there’s an 8MP selfie camera with an LED flash. Image quality is fine, although detail does degrade fairly quickly with indoors lighting. This is where the flash steps in.

A white LED flash blasting at your face is never going to be that flattering, but it does actually work unlike some front flashes that barely seem to have an effect at all. For the serial Instagram selfie-botherers there are also face-enhancing modes to let you smooth-out your skin.

Camera samples gallery

Verdict

The Moto G5S Plus is, in a specs sense at least, not a major step up from the Moto G5 Plus. Its dual camera setup isn’t worth getting that excited about and the processing power is similar.

However, in person the shift is greater. Build quality has been dramatically improved and the larger screen offers something missing from the last wave of Motos. And we’re glad to see the 5.5-inch screen option return as it’s much better for gamers and video streamers.

Coming up with a new phone this quickly is likely to confuse some buyers, but we'd recommend this over the Moto G5 Plus.

However its successor, the Moto G6 Plus, looks to be just around the corner, so you may want to hold off until that's been announced.

It may be a more tempting proposition, and even if it isn't its arrival should drive the Moto G5S Plus price down.

Who's this for?

If you want a high-quality phone from a well-known brand but don’t want to spend too much, the Lenovo Moto G5S Plus is for you.

It’s much larger, and slightly better-spec’d, than the Sony Xperia XA1 and has a much more straight-forward approach than the Honor rivals like the Honor 6X.

Should you buy it?

At almost the same price as the Moto G5 Plus there’s no reason to buy the older phone unless you can’t handle the G5S Plus’s larger screen. It’s a top option among budget handsets in general too.

The competition

The Moto G5S Plus is one of the best big screen budget phones around, but the following four handsets are also worth considering.

Moto G5 Plus

This phone's direct predecessor is the Moto G5 Plus, without the "S". The two are less similar than they sound, as the new version is significantly larger, with a 5.5-inch screen instead of a 5.2-inch one.

The G5S Plus also gains dual cameras and a much-improved all-metal shell. In theory, the older phone should have better low-light performance thanks to its large 12MP sensor, but in practice they’re roughly on-par.

Sony Xperia XA1

If you're buying to a budget rather than to find a large-screen phone, the much smaller Sony Xperia XA1is worth a look. It is much more pocket-friendly than the Moto, and has a much higher resolution 23MP camera that can take some seriously detail-packed photos.

However, the Moto G5S Plus has a higher-end build, a sharper screen and is better value all-round.

Honor 9

If you want to level-up to the next league of phones, the Honor 9 is your best aggressively-priced bet. Yes, it's a lot more expensive than the Moto, but also offers a true high-end chipset and a slightly smarter camera.

Oh, and it's also one of the shiniest phones you can get thanks to its dynamic multi-layered glass back. The question is: do you want a high-end phone at a mid-range price or are you happy with one that gets you something close-ish to the high-end experience for much less?